Update SIMD-0001 #157
Update SIMD-0001 #157
Conversation
Benhawkins18
requested review from
t-nelson,
jacobcreech,
ripatel-fd and
lheeger-jump
|
Could you also add this to the mermaid diagram and within the cicd? Otherwise this seems like a great change to me. It'll help us better track activation of each SIMD. I'll wait until other core contributors opine before we decide to pull this in. |
Benhawkins18
force-pushed
the
update-simd-0001
branch
from
66cfdcf to
3ea6ea3
Compare
… back in after all SIMD's have been updated
| @@ -130,7 +136,8 @@ is descriptive) | |||
| - Fill in the proposal. Put care into the details: proposals that do not | |||
| present convincing motivation, demonstrate lack of understanding of the | |||
| design's impact, or are disingenuous about the drawbacks or alternatives tend | |||
| to be poorly received. | |||
| to be poorly received. Low quality proposals with limited engagement will be | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How would you define limited engagement? It may be easier to define a length of time such as what we had with stagnant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just got rid of the "limited engagement" text.
| @@ -83,6 +84,7 @@ The stages in a lifecycle of a proposal are as follows: | |||
| - Stagnant | |||
| - Withdrawn | |||
| - Implemented | |||
| - Activated | |||
|
|
|||
| ```mermaid | |||
| flowchart LR | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
seems like the Idea state below dies with the gh discussions change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I think that's a reasonable point. Considering making a change to the flow further down the line.
| - **Networking**: | ||
| Changes or substantial improvements to network protocol specifications. | ||
| - **Interfaces**: | ||
| Breaking changes around the client JSON RPC API specifications and standards. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i don't believe json rpc is under simd (nor should it be). svm et. al probably a better example for an interfaces bullet point
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had a simiiliar thought. I would like to address this an a separate change further down the line. This mirrors SIMD-0001 for now
| The SIMD repository has three levels of access, as detailed in | ||
| [SIMD-0007](https://github.com/solana-foundation/solana-improvement-documents/blob/main/proposals/0007-access-policy.md): | ||
|
|
||
| 1. Triage | ||
| 2. Write | ||
| 3. Maintain | ||
|
|
||
| To request access or report misuse, please follow the procedures outlined in | ||
| SIMD-0007. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it will probably pay to avoid info duplication here and simply link out to simd-0007 with a bit of guiding commentary
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I went back and forth on this my self. I'd like to keep it the same but only hold that opinion loosely
Co-authored-by: Jacob Creech <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Trent Nelson <[email protected]>
|
I think this is a reasonable change. Let's pull this in Thursday if there are no further comments from other write-access core contributors. |
This update does 2 things:
If this PR gets accepted then I will post a PR updating all the existing SIMDs to their correct status and in the future we will only merge SIMDs with the status "Accepted". No more "Draft" status in the main canonical branch.