RIP: 1 Title: RIP Purpose and Guidelines Author: Tron Black Comments-Summary: No comments yet. Comments-URI: https://github.com/ravenwallet/rips Status: Final Type: Process Created: 2018-06-13
RIP stands for Ravencoin Improvement Proposal. A RIP is a design document providing information to the Ravencoin community, or describing a new feature for Ravencoin or its processes or environment. The RIP should provide a concise technical specification of the feature and a rationale for the feature.
We intend RIPs to be the primary mechanisms for proposing new features, for collecting community input on an issue, and for documenting the design decisions that have gone into Ravencoin. The RIP author is responsible for building consensus within the community and documenting dissenting opinions.
Because the RIPs are maintained as text files in a versioned repository, their revision history is the historical record of the feature proposal.
There are three kinds of RIP:
- A Standards Track RIP describes any change that affects most or all Ravencoin implementations, such as a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, or any change or addition that affects the interoperability of applications using Ravencoin.
- An Informational RIP describes a Ravencoin design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the Ravencoin community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational RIPs do not necessarily represent a Ravencoin community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore Informational RIPs or follow their advice.
- A Process RIP describes a process surrounding Ravencoin, or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process RIPs are like Standards Track RIPs but apply to areas other than the Ravencoin protocol itself. They may propose an implementation, but not to Ravencoin's codebase; they often require community consensus; unlike Informational RIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Ravencoin development. Any meta-RIP is also considered a Process RIP.
The RIP process begins with a new idea for Ravencoin. Each potential RIP must have a champion -- someone who writes the RIP using the style and format described below, shepherds the discussions in the appropriate forums, and attempts to build community consensus around the idea. The RIP champion (a.k.a. Author) should first attempt to ascertain whether the idea is RIP-able.
Vetting an idea publicly before going as far as writing a RIP is meant to save both the potential author and the wider community time. Many ideas have been brought forward for changing Ravencoin that have been rejected for various reasons. Asking the Ravencoin community first if an idea is original helps prevent too much time being spent on something that is guaranteed to be rejected based on prior discussions (searching the internet does not always do the trick). It also helps to make sure the idea is applicable to the entire community and not just the author. Just because an idea sounds good to the author does not mean it will work for most people in most areas where Ravencoin is used. Small enhancements or patches often don't need standardisation between multiple projects; these don't need a RIP and should be injected into the relevant Ravencoin development work flow with a patch submission to the applicable Ravencoin issue tracker.
Once the champion has asked the Ravencoin community as to whether an idea has any chance of acceptance, a draft RIP should be presented to the RavencoinTalk forum https://www.ravencointalk.org/. This gives the author a chance to flesh out the draft RIP to make it properly formatted, of high quality, and to address additional concerns about the proposal. A draft must be written in RIP style as described below, else it will be sent back without further regard until proper formatting rules are followed.
RIP authors are responsible for collecting community feedback on both the initial idea and the RIP before submitting it for review. However, wherever possible, long open-ended discussions on public mailing lists should be avoided. Strategies to keep the discussions efficient include: setting up a separate SIG mailing list for the topic, having the RIP author accept private comments in the early design phases, setting up a wiki page or git repository, etc. RIP authors should use their discretion here.
It is highly recommended that a single RIP contain a single key proposal or new idea. The more focused the RIP, the more successful it tends to be. If in doubt, split your RIP into several well-focused ones.
The RIP editors assign RIP numbers and change their status. Please send all RIP-related email to the RIP editor, which is listed under RIP Editors below. Also see RIP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow. The RIP editor reserves the right to reject RIP proposals if they appear too unfocused or too broad.
Authors MUST NOT self assign RIP numbers, but should use an alias such as "rip-johndoe-votingimprovement" which includes the author's name/nick and the RIP subject.
If the RIP editor approves, he will assign the RIP a number, label it as Standards Track, Informational, or Process, give it status "Draft", and add it to the RIPs git repository. The RIP editor will not unreasonably deny a RIP. Reasons for denying RIP status include duplication of effort, disregard for formatting rules, being too unfocused or too broad, being technically unsound, not providing proper motivation or addressing backwards compatibility, or not in keeping with the Ravencoin philosophy. For a RIP to be accepted it must meet certain minimum criteria. It must be a clear and complete description of the proposed enhancement. The enhancement must represent a net improvement. The proposed implementation, if applicable, must be solid and must not complicate the protocol unduly.
The RIP author may update the Draft as necessary in the git repository. Updates to drafts may also be submitted by the author as pull requests.
Standards Track RIPs consist of two parts, a design document and a reference implementation. The RIP should be reviewed and accepted before a reference implementation is begun, unless a reference implementation will aid people in studying the RIP. Standards Track RIPs must include an implementation -- in the form of code, a patch, or a URL to same -- before it can be considered Final.
Once a RIP has been accepted, the reference implementation must be completed. When the reference implementation is complete and accepted by the community, the status will be changed to "Final".
A RIP can also be assigned status "Deferred". The RIP author or editor can assign the RIP this status when no progress is being made on the RIP. Once a RIP is deferred, the RIP editor can re-assign it to draft status.
A RIP can also be "Rejected". Perhaps after all is said and done it was not a good idea. It is still important to have a record of this fact.
RIPs can also be superseded by a different RIP, rendering the original obsolete. This is intended for Informational RIPs, where version 2 of an API can replace version 1.
The possible paths of the status of RIPs are as follows:
Some Informational and Process RIPs may also have a status of "Active" if they are never meant to be completed. E.g. RIP 1 (this RIP).
Each RIP should have the following parts:
- Preamble -- RFC 822 style headers containing meta-data about the RIP, including the RIP number, a short descriptive title (limited to a maximum of 44 characters), the names, and optionally the contact info for each author, etc.
- Abstract -- a short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.
- Copyright/public domain -- Each RIP must either be explicitly labelled as placed in the public domain (see this RIP as an example) or licensed under the Open Publication License.
- Specification -- The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature. The specification should be detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for any of the current Ravencoin platforms.
- Motivation -- The motivation is critical for RIPs that want to change the Ravencoin protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the RIP solves. RIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.
- Rationale -- The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the feature is supported in other languages.
- The rationale should provide evidence of consensus within the community and discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.
- Backwards Compatibility -- All RIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The RIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. RIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.
- Reference Implementation -- The reference implementation must be completed before any RIP is given status "Final", but it need not be completed before the RIP is accepted. It is better to finish the specification and rationale first and reach consensus on it before writing code.
- The final implementation must include test code and documentation appropriate for the Ravencoin protocol.
RIPs should be written in mediawiki or markdown format.
Each RIP must begin with an RFC 822 style header preamble. The headers must appear in the following order. Headers marked with "*" are optional and are described below. All other headers are required.
RIP: <RIP number>
Title: <RIP title>
Author: <list of authors' real names and optionally, email addrs>
* Discussions-To: <email address>
Status: <Draft | Active | Accepted | Deferred | Rejected |
Withdrawn | Final | Superseded>
Type: <Standards Track | Informational | Process>
Created: <date created on, in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format>
* Post-History: <dates of postings to bitcoin mailing list>
* Replaces: <RIP number>
* Superseded-By: <RIP number>
* Resolution: <url>
The Author header lists the names, and optionally the email addresses of all the authors/owners of the RIP. The format of the Author header value must be
Random J. User <[email protected]>
if the email address is included, and just
Random J. User
if the address is not given.
If there are multiple authors, each should be on a separate line following RFC 2822 continuation line conventions.
Note: The Resolution header is required for Standards Track RIPs only. It contains a URL that should point to an email message or other web resource where the pronouncement about the RIP is made.
While a RIP is in private discussions (usually during the initial Draft phase), a Discussions-To header will indicate the mailing list or URL where the RIP is being discussed. No Discussions-To header is necessary if the RIP is being discussed privately with the author, or on the bitcoin email mailing lists.
The Type header specifies the type of RIP: Standards Track, Informational, or Process.
The Created header records the date that the RIP was assigned a number, while Post-History is used to record the dates of when new versions of the RIP are posted to bitcoin mailing lists. Both headers should be in yyyy-mm-dd format, e.g. 2001-08-14.
RIPs may have a Requires header, indicating the RIP numbers that this RIP depends on.
RIPs may also have a Superseded-By header indicating that a RIP has been rendered obsolete by a later document; the value is the number of the RIP that replaces the current document. The newer RIP must have a Replaces header containing the number of the RIP that it rendered obsolete.
RIPs may include auxiliary files such as diagrams. Image files should be included in a subdirectory for that RIP. Auxiliary files must be named RIP-XXXX-Y.ext, where "XXXX" is the RIP number, "Y" is a serial number (starting at 1), and "ext" is replaced by the actual file extension (e.g. "png").
It occasionally becomes necessary to transfer ownership of RIPs to a new champion. In general, we'd like to retain the original author as a co-author of the transferred RIP, but that's really up to the original author. A good reason to transfer ownership is because the original author no longer has the time or interest in updating it or following through with the RIP process, or has fallen off the face of the 'net (i.e. is unreachable or not responding to email). A bad reason to transfer ownership is because you don't agree with the direction of the RIP. We try to build consensus around a RIP, but if that's not possible, you can always submit a competing RIP.
If you are interested in assuming ownership of a RIP, send a message asking to take over, addressed to both the original author and the RIP editor. If the original author doesn't respond to email in a timely manner, the RIP editor will make a unilateral decision (it's not like such decisions can't be reversed :).
The current RIP editor is Tron who can be contacted at [email protected].
The RIP editor subscribes to the Ravencoin forums. All RIP-related correspondence should be sent (or CC'd) to [email protected].
For each new RIP that comes in an editor does the following:
- Read the RIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The ideas must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likely to be accepted.
- The title should accurately describe the content.
- Edit the RIP for language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.), markup (for reST RIPs), code style.
Once the RIP is ready for the repository it should be submitted as a "pull request" to the https://github.com/ravenwallet/rips repository on GitHub where it may get further feedback.
The RIP editor will:
- Assign a RIP number (almost always just the next available number, but sometimes it's a special/joke number, like 666 or 3141) in the pull request comments.
- Merge the pull request when the author is ready (allowing some time for further peer review).
- List the RIP in README.mediawiki
- Send email back to the RIP author with next steps (post to appropriate forum).
This document was derived heavily from Python's PEP-0001 and BIP. In many places text was simply copied and modified. Although the PEP-0001 text was written by Barry Warsaw, Jeremy Hylton, and David Goodger, they are not responsible for its use in the Ravencoin Improvement Process, and should not be bothered with technical questions specific to Ravencoin or the RIP process. Please direct all comments to the RIP editors or the Ravencoin forums. Additionally, this process was also derived heavily from the BIP process for which we thank Amir Taaki.