The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features or changes with global impact to architecture or coding style to enter the project.

Active RFC List

You should consider using this process if you intend to make "substantial" changes to Webstudio or its documentation. Some examples that would benefit from an RFC are:

• A new feature that creates new API surface area, and would require a feature flag if introduced.
• The removal of features that already shipped as part of the release channel.
• The introduction of new idiomatic usage or conventions, even if they do not include code changes to Webstudio itself.
• Change to how Webstudio applications are architectured
• Change to the coding style of choice

Some changes do not require an RFC:

• Rephrasing, reorganizing or refactoring
• Addition or removal of warnings
• Additions that strictly improve objective, numerical quality criteria (speedup, better browser support)

In practice, Webstudio RFCs serve two purposes:

• Webstudio Team RFCs are submitted by Webstudio Team members after extensive (sometimes, multi-month or multi-year) design, discussion, and experimentation.

• Community RFCs can be submitted by anyone. We apply the same level of rigour both to Webstudio Team RFCs and Community RFCs.

• Fork the RFC repo http://github.com/webstudio-is/rfcs
• Copy 0000-template.md to text/0000-my-feature.md (where 'my-feature' is descriptive. Don't assign an RFC number yet).
• Fill in the RFC. Put care into the details: RFCs 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. As a pull request the RFC will receive design feedback from the larger community, and the author should be prepared to revise it in response.
• Build consensus and integrate feedback. RFCs that have broad support are much more likely to make progress than those that don't receive any comments.
• Eventually, the team will decide whether the RFC is a candidate for inclusion in Webstudio.
• An RFC can be modified based upon feedback from the team and community.
• An RFC may be rejected by the team after public discussion has settled and comments have been made summarizing the rationale for rejection. A member of the team should then close the RFCs associated pull request.
• An RFC may be accepted at the close of its final comment period. A team member will merge the RFCs associated pull request, at which point the RFC will become 'active'.

Once an RFC becomes active, then authors may implement it and submit the feature as a pull request to the repo. Becoming 'active' is not a rubber stamp, and in particular still does not mean the feature will ultimately be merged; it does mean that the core team has agreed to it in principle and are amenable to merging it.

Furthermore, the fact that a given RFC has been accepted and is 'active' implies nothing about what priority is assigned to its implementation, nor whether anybody is currently working on it.

Modifications to active RFCs can be done in followup PRs. We strive to write each RFC 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 RFC to actually reflect what the end result will be at the time of the next major release; therefore we try to keep each RFC document somewhat in sync with the language feature as planned, tracking such changes via followup pull requests to the document.

The author of an RFC is not obligated to implement it. Of course, the RFC author (like any other developer) is welcome to post an implementation for review after the RFC has been accepted.

If you are interested in working on the implementation for an 'active' RFC, but cannot determine if someone else is already working on it, feel free to ask (e.g. by leaving a comment on the associated issue).