From e5f33b9839c0f962b85ef2e73673d518619cb0c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Catalan Lover <48515417+FSG-Cat@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:27:11 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Clean up MSC_CHECKLIST.md (#4200) Signed-off-by: Catalan Lover catalanlover@protonmail.com --- MSC_CHECKLIST.md | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/MSC_CHECKLIST.md b/MSC_CHECKLIST.md index 88e32998d..f6bf3d5f8 100644 --- a/MSC_CHECKLIST.md +++ b/MSC_CHECKLIST.md @@ -11,40 +11,42 @@ MSC authors, feel free to ask in a thread on your PR or in the [#matrix-spec:matrix.org](https://matrix.to/#/#matrix-spec:matrix.org) room for clarification of any of these points. -- [ ] Are [appropriate - implementation(s)](https://spec.matrix.org/proposals/#implementing-a-proposal) - specified in the MSC’s PR description? +- [ ] Are [appropriate implementation(s)](https://spec.matrix.org/proposals/#implementing-a-proposal) + specified in the MSC’s PR description? - [ ] Are all MSCs that this MSC depends on already accepted? - [ ] For each new endpoint that is introduced: - - [ ] Have authentication requirements been specified? - - [ ] Have rate-limiting requirements been specified? - - [ ] Have guest access requirements been specified? - - [ ] Are error responses specified? - - [ ] Does each error case have a specified `errcode` (e.g. `M_FORBIDDEN`) and HTTP status code? - - [ ] If a new `errcode` is introduced, is it clear that it is new? + - [ ] Have authentication requirements been specified? + - [ ] Have rate-limiting requirements been specified? + - [ ] Have guest access requirements been specified? + - [ ] Are error responses specified? + - [ ] Does each error case have a specified `errcode` (e.g. `M_FORBIDDEN`) and HTTP status code? + - [ ] If a new `errcode` is introduced, is it clear that it is new? - [ ] Will the MSC require a new room version, and if so, has that been made clear? - - [ ] Is the reason for a new room version clearly stated? For example, + - [ ] Is the reason for a new room version clearly stated? For example, modifying the set of redacted fields changes how event IDs are calculated, thus requiring a new room version. - [ ] Are backwards-compatibility concerns appropriately addressed? - [ ] Are the [endpoint conventions](https://spec.matrix.org/latest/appendices/#conventions-for-matrix-apis) honoured? - - [ ] Do HTTP endpoints `use_underscores_like_this`? - - [ ] Will the endpoint return unbounded data? If so, has pagination been considered? - - [ ] If the endpoint utilises pagination, is it consistent with [the - appendices](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.8/appendices/#pagination)? + - [ ] Do HTTP endpoints `use_underscores_like_this`? + - [ ] Will the endpoint return unbounded data? If so, has pagination been considered? + - [ ] If the endpoint utilises pagination, is it consistent with + [the appendices](https://spec.matrix.org/v1.8/appendices/#pagination)? - [ ] An introduction exists and clearly outlines the problem being solved. - Ideally, the first paragraph should be understandable by a non-technical - audience + Ideally, the first paragraph should be understandable by a non-technical audience. - [ ] All outstanding threads are resolved - - [ ] All feedback is incorporated into the proposal text itself, either as a fix or noted as an alternative -- [ ] While the exact sections do not need to be present, the details implied by the proposal template are covered. Namely: - - [ ] Introduction - - [ ] Proposal text - - [ ] Potential issues - - [ ] Alternatives - - [ ] Dependencies + - [ ] All feedback is incorporated into the proposal text itself, either as a fix or noted as an alternative +- [ ] While the exact sections do not need to be present, + the details implied by the proposal template are covered. Namely: + - [ ] Introduction + - [ ] Proposal text + - [ ] Potential issues + - [ ] Alternatives + - [ ] Dependencies - [ ] Stable identifiers are used throughout the proposal, except for the unstable prefix section - - [ ] Unstable prefixes [consider](README.md#unstable-prefixes) the awkward accepted-but-not-merged state - - [ ] Chosen unstable prefixes do not pollute any global namespace (use “org.matrix.mscXXXX”, not “org.matrix”). + - [ ] Unstable prefixes [consider](README.md#unstable-prefixes) the awkward accepted-but-not-merged state + - [ ] Chosen unstable prefixes do not pollute any global namespace (use “org.matrix.mscXXXX”, not “org.matrix”). - [ ] Changes have applicable [Sign Off](CONTRIBUTING.md#sign-off) from all authors/editors/contributors -- [ ] There is a dedicated "Security Considerations" section which detail any possible attacks/vulnerabilities this proposal may introduce, even if this is "None.". See [RFC3552](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3552) for things to think about, but in particular pay attention to the [OWASP Top Ten](https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/). +- [ ] There is a dedicated "Security Considerations" section which detail + any possible attacks/vulnerabilities this proposal may introduce, even if this is "None.". + See [RFC3552](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3552) for things to think about, + but in particular pay attention to the [OWASP Top Ten](https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/).