0dc5d4df07
* ABCI++ RFC This commit adds an RFC for ABCI++, which is a collection of three new phases of communication between the consensus engine and the application. Co-authored-by: Sunny Aggarwal <sunnya97@protonmail.ch> * Fix bugs pointed out by @liamsi * Update rfc/004-abci++.md Co-authored-by: Federico Kunze <31522760+fedekunze@users.noreply.github.com> * Fix markdown lints * Update rfc/004-abci++.md Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <Ismail.Khoffi@gmail.com> * Update rfc/004-abci++.md Co-authored-by: Tess Rinearson <tess.rinearson@gmail.com> * Update rfc/004-abci++.md Co-authored-by: Tess Rinearson <tess.rinearson@gmail.com> * Add information about the rename in the context section * Bold RFC * Add example for self-authenticating vote data * More exposition of the term IPC * Update pros / negatives * Fix sentence fragment * Add desc for no-ops Co-authored-by: Sunny Aggarwal <sunnya97@protonmail.ch> Co-authored-by: Federico Kunze <31522760+fedekunze@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <Ismail.Khoffi@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Tess Rinearson <tess.rinearson@gmail.com>
Request for Comments (RFC)
RFC stands for Request for Comments. It is a social device use to float and polish an idea prior to the inclusion into an existing or new spec/paper/research topic.
An RFC should not be used for bug reports or trivial discussions - the overhead of compiling an RFC does not justify it.
An RFC should not consist only of a problem statement (use a standard issue for that).
A RFC should consist of:
- Changelog
- Context on the relevant goals and the current state
- Proposed Solution
- Summary of pros and cons
- References
If recorded decisions turned out to be lacking, convene a discussion, record the new decisions here, and then modify the code to match.
Note the context/background should be written in the present tense.
Some RFC's will be presented at a Tendermint Dev Session. If you are an outside contributor and have submitted a RFC, you may be invited to present your RFC at one of these calls.