Filename: 001-process.txt
Title: The Tor Proposal Process
Version: $Revision: 11537 $
Last-Modified: $Date: 2007-01-26T19:04:29.998860Z $
Author: Nick Mathewson
Created: 30-Jan-2007
Status: Meta

Overview:

   This document describes how to change the Tor specifications, how Tor
   proposals work, and the relationship between Tor proposals and the
   specifications.

   This is an informational document.

Motivation:

   Previously, our process for updating the Tor specifications was maximally
   informal: we'd patch the specification (sometimes forking first, and
   sometimes not), then discuss the patches, reach consensus, and implement
   the changes.

   This had a few problems.

   First, even at its most efficient, the old process would often have the
   spec out of sync with the code.  The worst cases were those where
   implementation was deferred: the spec and could stay out of sync for
   versions at a time.

   Second, it was hard to participate in discussion, since you had to know
   which portions of the spec were a proposal, and which were already
   implemented.

   Third, it littered the specifications with too many inline comments.
     [This was a real problem -NM]
       [Especially when it went to multiple levels! -NM]
         [XXXX especially when they weren't signed and talked about that
          thing that you can't remember after a year]

How to change the specs now:

   First, somebody writes a proposal document.  It should describe the change
   that should be made in detail, and give some idea of how to implement it.
   Once it's fleshed out enough, it becomes a proposal.

   Like an RFC, every proposal gets a number.  Unlike RFCs, proposals can
   change over time and keep the same number.  The history for each proposal
   will be stored in the Tor Subversion repository.

   Once a proposal is in the repository, we should discuss and improve it
   until we've reached consensus that it's a good idea, and that it's
   detailed enough to implement.  When this happens, we implement the
   proposal and incorporate it into the specifications.  Thus, the specs
   remain the canonical documentation for the Tor protocol: no proposal is
   ever the canonical documentation for an implemented feature.

   {It's still okay to make mall changes to the spec if the code can be
   written more or less immediately, or cosmetic changes if no code change is
   required.  This document reflects the current developers' _intent_, not
   a permanent promise to always use this process in the future: we reserve
   the right to get really excited and run off and implement something in a
   caffeine-and-m&m-fueled all-night hacking session.}

Proposal status:

   Open: A proposal under discussion.

   Accepted: The proposal is complete, and we intend to implement it.

   Finished: The proposal has been accepted and implemented.

   Closed: The proposal has been accepted, implemented, and merged into the
      main specification documents.

   Rejected: We're not going to implement the feature as described here,
      though we might do some other version.  See comments in the document
      for details.

   Needs-Revision: The idea for the proposal is a good one, but the proposal
      as it stands has serious problems that keep it from being accepted.
      See comments in the document for details.

   Dead: The proposal hasn't been touched in a long time, and it doesn't look
      like anybody is going to complete it soon.

   Needs-Research: There are research problems that need to be solved before
      it's clear whether the proposal is a good idea.

   Meta: This is not a proposal, but a document about proposals.

Proposal numbering:

   Numbers 000-099 are reserved for special and meta-proposals.  100 and up
   are used for actual proposals.  Numbers aren't recycled.

What should go in a proposal:

   WRITE MORE.

   Before a proposal is "ACCEPTED", it should have about as much detail as
   the specs would for the proposed feature.