isabella232 / firefly-fir

layout	title	nav_order
default	FIR Process	2

Hyperledger FireFly FIR Process

Many changes, including bug fixes and documentation improvements can be implemented and reviewed via the normal GitHub pull request workflow.

Some changes though are substantial, and we ask that these be put through a bit of a design process and produce a consensus among the FireFly maintainers and broader community.

The FIR (FireFly Improvement Request) (pronounced "fire") process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for major changes to FireFly and other official project components, so that all stakeholders can be confident about the direction in which FireFly is evolving.

This process is intended to be substantially similar to the RFCs process other Hyperledger teams have adopted, customized as necessary for use with FireFly. The README.md and 0000-template.md files were forked from the Fabric RFCs repo which was in turn forked from the Sawtooth RFCss repo, which was itself derived from the Rust project.

Table of Contents

• When you need to follow this process
• Before creating a FIR
• What the process is
• The FIR life-cycle
• Reviewing FIRs
• Implementing a FIR
• License
• Contributions

When you need to follow this process

You need to follow this process if you intend to make substantial changes to the FireFly Core, any of its sub-components including but not limited to, firefly-ethconnect, firefly-fabconnect or the FIR process itself. What constitutes a substantial change is evolving based on community norms and varies depending on what part of the ecosystem you are proposing to change, but may include the following:

• Architectural changes
• Substantial changes to component interfaces
• New core features
• Backward incompatible changes
• Changes that affect the security of communications or administration

Some changes do not require a FIR:

• Rephrasing, reorganizing, refactoring, or otherwise "changing shape does not change meaning".
• Additions that strictly improve objective, numerical quality criteria (warning removal, speedup, better platform coverage, more parallelism, trap more errors, etc.).

If you submit a pull request to implement a new feature without going through the FIR process, it may be closed with a polite request to submit a FIR first.

Before creating a FIR

A hastily-proposed FIR can hurt its chances of acceptance. Low quality proposals, proposals for previously-rejected changes, or those that don't fit into the near-term roadmap, may be quickly rejected, which can be demotivating for the unprepared contributor. Laying some groundwork ahead of the FIR can make the process smoother.

Although there is no single way to prepare for submitting a FIR, it is generally a good idea to pursue feedback from other project developers beforehand, to ascertain that the FIR may be desirable; having a consistent impact on the project requires concerted effort toward consensus-building.

The most common preparations for writing and submitting a FIR include talking the idea over to the FireFly mailing list.

As a rule of thumb, receiving encouraging feedback from long-standing project developers, and particularly the project's maintainers is a good indication that the FIR is worth pursuing.

What the process is

In short, to get a major feature added to FireFly, one must first get the FIR merged into the FIR repository as a markdown file. At that point the FIR is "active" and may be implemented with the goal of eventual inclusion into FireFly.

• Fork the FIR repository.
• Copy 0000-template.md to text/0000-my-feature.md, where "my-feature" is descriptive. Don't assign a FIR number yet.
• Fill in the FIR. Put care into the details — FIRs that do not present convincing motivation, demonstrate understanding of the impact of the design, or are disingenuous about the drawbacks or alternatives tend to be poorly received.
• Submit a pull request. The pull request will be assigned to a maintainer, and will receive design feedback from the larger community; the FIR author should be prepared to revise it in response.
• Build consensus and integrate feedback. FIRs that have broad support are much more likely to make progress than those that don't receive any comments. Feel free to reach out to the pull request assignee in particular to get help identifying stakeholders and obstacles.
• The maintainers will discuss the FIR pull request, as much as possible in the comment thread of the pull request itself. Offline discussion will be summarized on the pull request comment thread.
• A good way to build consensus on a FIR pull request is to summarize the FIR on a community contributor meeting. Coordinate with a maintainer to get on a contributor meeting agenda. While this is not necessary, it may help to foster sufficient consensus such that the FIR can proceed to final comment period.
• FIRs rarely go through this process unchanged, especially as alternatives and drawbacks are shown. You can make edits, big and small, to the FIR to clarify or change the design, but make changes as new commits to the pull request, and leave a comment on the pull request explaining your changes. Specifically, do not squash or rebase commits after they are visible on the pull request.
• At some point, a FireFly maintainer will propose a "motion for final comment period" (FCP), along with a disposition for the FIR (merge, close, or postpone).
  • This step is taken when enough of the tradeoffs have been discussed that the maintainers are in a position to make a decision. That does not require consensus amongst all participants in the FIR thread (which is usually impossible). However, the argument supporting the disposition on the FIR needs to have already been clearly articulated, and there should not be a strong consensus against that position. FireFly maintainers will use their best judgment in taking this step, and the FCP itself ensures there is ample time and notification for stakeholders to push back if it is made prematurely.
  • For FIRs with lengthy discussion, the motion to FCP is usually preceded by a summary comment trying to lay out the current state of the discussion and major trade-offs/points of disagreement.
  • Before actually entering FCP, the FireFly maintainer who proposes that the FIR enter FCP ensures that other interested maintainers have reviewed the FIR and at least two other maintainers (three total) have indicated agreement; this is often the point at which many maintainers first review the FIR in full depth. Note that maintainers from any FireFly repository may review and indicate agreement, especially for FIRs that impact multiple repositories.
• The FCP lasts one week, or seven calendar days. It is also advertised widely, e.g. in the FireFly Mailing List. This way all stakeholders have a chance to lodge any final objections before a decision is reached.
• In most cases, the FCP period is quiet since the most interested maintainers have already indicated agreement, and the FIR is either merged or closed. However, sometimes substantial new arguments or ideas are raised, the FCP is canceled, and the FIR goes back into development mode.

The FIR life-cycle

Once a FIR is merged, it becomes "active" and developers may implement it and submit the code change as a pull request to the corresponding FireFly repo. Being "active" is not a rubber stamp, and it does not mean the change will ultimately be merged; it does mean that in principle all the major stakeholders have agreed to the change, and are amenable to merging it.

Furthermore, the fact that a given FIR has been accepted and is "active" implies nothing about what priority is assigned to its implementation, nor does it imply anything about whether a FireFly developer has been assigned the task of implementing the feature. While it is not necessary that the author of the FIR also write the implementation, it is by far the most effective way to see a FIR through to completion: authors should not expect that other project developers will take on responsibility for implementing their accepted feature.

Modifications to active FIRs can be done in follow-up pull requests. We strive to write each FIR in a manner that it will reflect the final design of the feature; but the nature of the process means that we cannot expect every merged FIR to actually reflect what the end result will be at the time of the next major release.

In general, once accepted, FIRs should not be substantially changed. Only very minor changes should be submitted as amendments. More substantial changes should be new FIRs, with a note added to the original FIR. Exactly what counts as a "very minor change" is up to the maintainers to decide.

Reviewing FIRs

While the FIR pull request is up, the maintainers may schedule meetings with the author and/or relevant stakeholders to discuss the issues in greater detail, and in some cases the topic may be discussed at a contributors meeting. In either case a summary from the meeting will be posted back to the FIR pull request.

The FireFly maintainers make the final decisions about FIRs after the benefits and drawbacks are well understood. These decisions can be made at any time, but the maintainers will regularly issue decisions. When a decision is made, the FIR pull request will either be merged or closed. In either case, if the reasoning is not clear from the discussion in thread, the maintainers will add a comment describing the rationale for the decision.

Implementing a FIR

Some accepted FIRs represent vital changes that need to be implemented right away. Other accepted FIRs can represent changes that can wait until a developer feels like doing the work. Every accepted FIR has an associated issue tracking its implementation in the FireFly JIRA issue tracker.

The author of a FIR is not obligated to implement it. Of course, the FIR author, as any other developer, is welcome to post an implementation for review after the FIR has been accepted. Use JIRA for this.

License

This repository is licensed under Apache License, Version 2.0 (LICENSE).

Contributions

Unless you explicitly state otherwise, any contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the work by you, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, shall be licensed as above, without any additional terms or conditions.