You cannot select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
243 lines
13 KiB
ReStructuredText
243 lines
13 KiB
ReStructuredText
.. title:: Proposals for Spec Changes to Matrix
|
|
|
|
.. contents:: Table of Contents
|
|
.. sectnum::
|
|
|
|
Proposals for Spec Changes to Matrix
|
|
------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
If you are interested in submitting a change to the matrix specification,
|
|
please take note of the following guidelines.
|
|
|
|
Community changes to the specification require a formal proposal process. This
|
|
involves writing a proposal, having it reviewed by the matrix community, having
|
|
the proposal being accepted, then actually having your ideas implemented as
|
|
committed changes to the `specification repository
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc>`_.
|
|
|
|
The process for submitting a Matrix Spec Change (MSC) Proposal in detail is as
|
|
follows:
|
|
|
|
- Create a first-draft of your proposal using `github-flavored markdown
|
|
<https://help.github.com/articles/basic-writing-and-formatting-syntax/>`_
|
|
|
|
- In the document, clearly state the problem being solved, and the possible
|
|
solutions being proposed for solving it and their respective trade-offs.
|
|
- Proposal documents are intended to be as lightweight and flexible as the
|
|
author desires; there is no formal template; the intention is to iterate
|
|
as quickly as possible to get to a good design.
|
|
- However, a `template with suggested headers
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/proposals/proposals_template.md>`_
|
|
is available to get you started if necessary.
|
|
- Take care in creating your proposal. Specify your intended changes, and
|
|
give reasoning to back them up. Changes without justification will likely
|
|
be poorly received by the community.
|
|
|
|
- Fork and make a PR to the `matrix-doc
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc>`_ repository.
|
|
|
|
- Your PR description must include a link to the rendered markdown document
|
|
and a summary of the proposal.
|
|
- It is often very helpful to link any related MSCs or `matrix-doc issues
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues>`_ to give context
|
|
for your proposal.
|
|
|
|
- Gather feedback as widely as possible from the community and core team.
|
|
|
|
- The aim is to get maximum consensus towards an optimal solution. Sometimes
|
|
trade-offs are required to meet this goal. Decisions should be made to the
|
|
benefit of all major use cases.
|
|
- A good place to ask for feedback on a specific proposal is
|
|
`#matrix-spec:matrix.org <https://matrix.to/#/#matrix-spec:matrix.org>`_.
|
|
However, it is welcome to use an alternative room if preferred please
|
|
advertise it in #matrix-spec:matrix.org and link to it on the PR for
|
|
visibility.
|
|
- For additional discussion areas, know that that #matrix-dev:matrix.org is
|
|
for developers using existing Matrix APIs, #matrix:matrix.org is for users
|
|
trying to run matrix apps (clients & servers) and
|
|
#matrix-architecture:matrix.org is for cross-cutting discussion of Matrix's
|
|
architectural design.
|
|
- The point of the spec proposal process is to be collaborative rather than
|
|
competitive, and to try to solve the problem in question with the optimal
|
|
set of trade-offs. The author should neutrally gather the various
|
|
viewpoints and get consensus, but this can sometimes be time-consuming (or
|
|
the author may be biased), in which case an impartial 'shepherd' can be
|
|
assigned to help guide the proposal through this process. A shepherd is
|
|
typically a neutral party from the core team or an experienced member of
|
|
the community. Having a shepherd is not a requirement for proposal
|
|
acceptance.
|
|
|
|
- Members of the core team will review and discuss the PR in the comments and
|
|
in relevant rooms on matrix. Discussion outside of Github should be
|
|
summarised in a comment on the PR.
|
|
- At some point a member of the core team will propose a motion for a final
|
|
comment period (FCP) with a *disposition* of merge, close or postpone. This
|
|
is usually preceded with a comment summarising the current state of the
|
|
discussion, along with reasoning for the motion.
|
|
- A concern can be raised by a core team member at any time, which will block
|
|
the FCP from beginning. An FCP will only be begin when a **majority** of core
|
|
team members agree on its outcome, and all existing concerns have been
|
|
resolved.
|
|
- The FCP will then begin and last for 5 days, giving anyone else some time to
|
|
speak up before it concludes. On its conclusion, the disposition of the FCP
|
|
will be carried out. If, however, sufficient reasoning for the FCP not to
|
|
conclude is raised, the FCP can be cancelled and the MSC will continue to
|
|
evolve accordingly.
|
|
- Once your proposal has been accepted and merged, it is time to submit the
|
|
actual change to the specification that your proposal reasoned about. This is
|
|
known as a spec PR. However in order for your spec PR to be accepted, you
|
|
**must** show an implementation to prove that it works well in practice. In
|
|
addition, any significant unforeseen changes to the original idea found
|
|
during this process will warrant another MSC.
|
|
|
|
- Please sign off the spec PR as per the `CONTRIBUTING.rst
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst>`_
|
|
guidelines.
|
|
|
|
- Your PR will then be reviewed and hopefully merged on the grounds it is
|
|
implemented sufficiently. If so, then give yourself a pat on the back knowing
|
|
you've contributed to the matrix protocol for the benefit of users and
|
|
developers alike :)
|
|
|
|
Proposals **must** act to the greater benefit of the entire Matrix ecosystem,
|
|
rather than benefiting or privileging any single player or subset of players
|
|
- and must not contain any patent encumbered IP. The Matrix core team pledges
|
|
to act as a neutral custodian for Matrix on behalf of the whole ecosystem,
|
|
just as it has since Matrix's inception in May 2014.
|
|
|
|
For clarity: the Matrix ecosystem is anyone who uses the Matrix protocol. That
|
|
includes client users, server admins, client developers, bot developers,
|
|
bridge and AS developers, users and admins who are indirectly using Matrix via
|
|
3rd party networks which happen to be bridged, server developers, room
|
|
moderators and admins, companies/projects building products or services on
|
|
Matrix, spec contributors, translators, and the core team who created it in
|
|
the first place.
|
|
|
|
"Greater benefit" could include maximising:
|
|
|
|
* the number of end-users reachable on the open Matrix network.
|
|
* the number of regular users on the Matrix network (e.g. 30-day retained
|
|
federated users)
|
|
* the number of online servers in the open federation.
|
|
* the number of developers building on Matrix.
|
|
* the number of independent implementations which use Matrix
|
|
* the quality and utility of the Matrix spec.
|
|
|
|
The guiding principles of the overall project are being worked on as part of
|
|
the upcoming governance proposal, but could be something like:
|
|
|
|
* Supporting the whole long-term ecosystem rather than individual stakeholder gain
|
|
* Openness rather than proprietariness
|
|
* Collaboration rather than competition
|
|
* Accessibility rather than elitism
|
|
* Transparency rather than stealth
|
|
* Empathy rather than contrariness
|
|
* Pragmatism rather than perfection
|
|
* Proof rather than conjecture
|
|
|
|
The above directions are intended to be simple and pragmatic rather than
|
|
exhaustive, and aim to provide guidelines until we have a formal spec
|
|
governance process in place that covers the whole Matrix community. In order
|
|
to get Matrix out of beta as quickly as possible, as of May 2018 we are
|
|
prioritising spec and reference implementation development over writing formal
|
|
governance, but a formal governance document will follow as rapidly as
|
|
possible.
|
|
|
|
The process for handling proposals is described in the following diagram. Note
|
|
that the lifetime of a proposal is tracked through the corresponding labels for
|
|
each stage in the `matrix-doc issue tracker
|
|
<https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues>`_.
|
|
|
|
::
|
|
|
|
+ +
|
|
Proposals | Spec PRs | Additional States
|
|
+-------+ | +------+ | +---------------+
|
|
| |
|
|
+----------------------+ | +---------+ | +-----------+
|
|
| | | | | | | |
|
|
| Proposal | | +------> Spec PR | | | Postponed |
|
|
| Drafting and Initial | | | | Missing | | | |
|
|
| Feedback Gathering | | | | | | +-----------+
|
|
| | | | +----+----+ |
|
|
+----------+-----------+ | | | | +----------+
|
|
| | | v | | |
|
|
v | | +-----------------+ | | Closed |
|
|
+-------------------+ | | | | | | |
|
|
| | | | | Spec PR Created | | +----------+
|
|
| Proposal PR | | | | and In Review | |
|
|
| Created | | | | | |
|
|
| | | | +--------+--------+ |
|
|
+---------+---------+ | | | |
|
|
| | | v |
|
|
v | | +-----------+ |
|
|
+-----------+ | | | | |
|
|
| | | | | Spec PR | |
|
|
| Proposal | | | | Merged! | |
|
|
| In Review | | | | | |
|
|
| | | | +-----------+ |
|
|
+-----+-----+ | | |
|
|
| | | |
|
|
v | | |
|
|
+----------------------+ | | |
|
|
| | | | |
|
|
| Final Comment Period | | | |
|
|
| | | | |
|
|
+----------+-----------+ | | |
|
|
| | | |
|
|
v | | |
|
|
+-------------+ | | |
|
|
| | | | |
|
|
| Proposal PR | | | |
|
|
| Merged! | | | |
|
|
| | | | |
|
|
+------+------+ | | |
|
|
| | | |
|
|
+-----------------+ |
|
|
| |
|
|
+ +
|
|
|
|
Lifetime States
|
|
---------------
|
|
|
|
============================= =======================================================
|
|
Proposal WIP A proposal document which is still work-in-progress but is being shared to incorporate feedback
|
|
Proposal In Review A proposal document which is now ready and waiting for review by the core team and community
|
|
Proposal Final Comment Period A proposal document which has reached final comment period either for merge, closure or postponement
|
|
Proposal Merged A proposal document which has passed review
|
|
Spec PR Missing A proposal that has been accepted but has not currently been implemented in the spec
|
|
Spec PR In Review A proposal that has been PR'd against the spec and is currently under review
|
|
Spec PR Merged A proposal with a sufficient working implementation and whose Spec PR has been merged!
|
|
Postponed A proposal that is temporarily blocked or a feature that may not be useful currently but perhaps sometime in the future
|
|
Closed A proposal which has been reviewed and deemed unsuitable for acceptance
|
|
============================= =======================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposal Tracking
|
|
-----------------
|
|
|
|
This is a living document generated from the list of proposals at
|
|
`matrix-doc/issues <https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-doc/issues>`_ on
|
|
GitHub.
|
|
|
|
We use labels and some metadata in MSC PR descriptions to generate this page.
|
|
Labels are assigned by the core team whilst triaging the issues based on those
|
|
which exist in the matrix-doc repo already.
|
|
|
|
Other metadata:
|
|
|
|
- the MSC (Matrix Spec Change) number is taken from the github Pull Request ID.
|
|
This is carried for the lifetime of the proposal. These IDs do not necessary
|
|
represent a chronological order.
|
|
- The github PR title will act as the MSC's title.
|
|
- Please link to the spec PR (if any) by adding a "PRs: #1234" line in the
|
|
issue description.
|
|
- The creation date is taken from the github PR, but can be overridden by
|
|
adding a "Date: yyyy-mm-dd" line in the PR description.
|
|
- Updated Date is taken from github.
|
|
- Author is the creator of the MSC PR, but can be overridden by adding a
|
|
"Author: @username" line in the body of the issue description. Please make
|
|
sure @username is a github user (include the @!)
|
|
- A shepherd can be assigned by adding a "Shepherd: @username" line in the
|
|
issue description. Again, make sure this is a real Github user.
|