From dev-return-49361-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@couchdb.apache.org Wed May 13 09:29:41 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id A4E7F18064A for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 11:29:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 95926 invoked by uid 500); 13 May 2020 09:29:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 95913 invoked by uid 99); 13 May 2020 09:29:40 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) (10.10.3.42) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:29:40 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-f182.google.com (mail-lj1-f182.google.com [209.85.208.182]) by mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 6F20A8266 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 09:29:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-f182.google.com with SMTP id g4so16994459ljl.2 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 02:29:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533EZI7kdWiw3pjh1vL/mbaZJkPvEo5JbZVVDujNn08vw9jv3fT6 AP+HknEVNvExBbm4Xzhxww8YxGJsNuRE+y0Spby1ug== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwyz32SqUQvsth59RkadpbB8uSq9uBLXTUN59VjNbOK0nkKX3EWkvilhBo934y0pZm81W/sw5ii3ullTLBraVU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8047:: with SMTP id p7mr15771302ljg.206.1589362179482; Wed, 13 May 2020 02:29:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Garren Smith Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 11:29:28 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Should we continue with FDB RFC's To: CouchDB Developers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000020e9b705a58438a4" --00000000000020e9b705a58438a4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi All, The majority of RFC's for CouchDB 4.x have gone stale and I want to know what everyone thinks we should do about it? Do you find the RFC's useful? So far I've found maintaining the RFC's really difficult. Often we write an RFC, then write the code. The code often ends up quite different from how we thought it would when writing the RFC. Following that smaller code changes and improvements to a section moves the codebase even further from the RFC design. Do we keep updating the RFC for every change or should we leave it at a certain point? I've found the discussion emails to be really useful way to explore the high-level design of each new feature. I would probably prefer that we continue the discussion emails but don't do the RFC unless its a feature that a lot of people want to be involved in the design. Cheers Garren --00000000000020e9b705a58438a4--