This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 29, 2020. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
RFC 0003: create a separate libp2p org #3
Open
flyingzumwalt
wants to merge
1
commit into
master
Choose a base branch
from
0003-spin-off-libp2p
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ | ||
- Feature Name: ispin-off-libp2p-org | ||
- Start Date: 2018-02-09 | ||
- RFC PR: (leave this empty) | ||
- IPFS Issue: (leave this empty) | ||
|
||
# Summary | ||
[summary]: #summary | ||
|
||
Create a separate organization to govern libp2p, with its own Roadmaps, RFCs and working groups. While the development teams working on IPFS and libp2p will continue to overlap strongly for a long time, this separation will allow libp2p to evolve along a trajectory that acknowledges all of its users without forcing those users to work through the IPFS org even if they aren't using IPFS. | ||
|
||
# Motivation | ||
[motivation]: #motivation | ||
|
||
Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome? | ||
|
||
Though the code base of libp2p initially evolved within IPFS, libp2p has its own distinct set of users, use cases, and adoption timelines. Decoupling the two protocols while maintaining tight coordination of the development roadmaps is a healthy move for both projects. It allows libp2p to accumulate its own set of adopters and contributors -- most of whom desperately need libp2p but do not need IPFS. | ||
|
||
# Guide-level explanation | ||
[guide-level-explanation]: #guide-level-explanation | ||
|
||
TODO | ||
|
||
# Reference-level explanation | ||
[reference-level-explanation]: #reference-level-explanation | ||
|
||
TODO | ||
|
||
# Drawbacks | ||
[drawbacks]: #drawbacks | ||
|
||
Why should we *not* do this? | ||
|
||
# Rationale and alternatives | ||
[alternatives]: #alternatives | ||
|
||
- Why is this design the best in the space of possible designs? | ||
- What other designs have been considered and what is the rationale for not choosing them? | ||
- What is the impact of not doing this? | ||
|
||
# Unresolved questions | ||
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions | ||
|
||
Resolve before merging: | ||
- Should RFCs be tracked separately, or should both orgs share a single RFCs repository? |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
typo: ispin?