init

0000-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+- Start Date: (fill me in with today's date, YYYY-MM-DD)
+- Target Major Version: (2.x / 3.x)
+- Reference Issues: (fill in existing related issues, if any)
+- Implementation PR: (leave this empty)
+
+# Summary
+
+Brief explanation of the feature.
+
+# Basic example
+
+If the proposal involves a new or changed API, include a basic code example.
+Omit this section if it's not applicable.
+
+# Motivation
+
+Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected
+outcome?
+
+Please focus on explaining the motivation so that if this RFC is not accepted,
+the motivation could be used to develop alternative solutions. In other words,
+enumerate the constraints you are trying to solve without coupling them too
+closely to the solution you have in mind.
+
+# Detailed design
+
+This is the bulk of the RFC. Explain the design in enough detail for somebody
+familiar with Vue to understand, and for somebody familiar with the
+implementation to implement. This should get into specifics and corner-cases,
+and include examples of how the feature is used. Any new terminology should be
+defined here.
+
+# Drawbacks
+
+Why should we *not* do this? Please consider:
+
+- implementation cost, both in term of code size and complexity
+- whether the proposed feature can be implemented in user space
+- the impact on teaching people Vue
+- integration of this feature with other existing and planned features
+- cost of migrating existing Vue applications (is it a breaking change?)
+
+There are tradeoffs to choosing any path. Attempt to identify them here.
+
+# Alternatives
+
+What other designs have been considered? What is the impact of not doing this?
+
+# Adoption strategy
+
+If we implement this proposal, how will existing Vue developers adopt it? Is
+this a breaking change? Can we write a codemod? Can we provide a runtime adapter library for the original API it replaces? How will this affect other projects in the Vue ecosystem?
+
+# Unresolved questions
+
+Optional, but suggested for first drafts. What parts of the design are still
+TBD?

README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+# Vue RFCs
+
+## What is an RFC?
+
+The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a
+consistent and controlled path for new features to enter the framework.
+
+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 Vue
+core team and the community.
+
+[Active RFC List](https://github.com/vuejs/rfcs/pulls)
+
+## When to follow this process
+
+You need to follow this process if you intend to make "substantial"
+changes to one of the projects listed below:
+
+- [Vue core](https://github.com/vuejs/vue)
+- [Vue Router](https://github.com/vuejs/vue-router)
+- [Vuex](https://github.com/vuejs/vuex)
+- [Vue CLI](https://github.com/vuejs/vue-cli)
+
+We are limiting the RFC process for these repos to test out the process in a more manageable fashion, and may expand it to cover more projects under the `vuejs` organization in the future. For now, if you wish to suggest changes to those other projects, please use their respective issue lists.
+
+What constitutes a "substantial" change is evolving based on community norms, but may include the following:
+
+- A new feature that creates new API surface area
+- Changing the semantics or behavior of an existing API
+- 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 Vue itself.
+
+Some changes do not require an RFC:
+
+- Fixing objectively incorrect behavior
+- Rephrasing, reorganizing or refactoring
+- Addition or removal of warnings
+- Additions that strictly improve objective, numerical quality criteria (speedup, better browser support)
+- Additions only likely to be _noticed by_ other implementors-of-Vue, invisible to users-of-Vue.
+
+If you submit a pull request to implement a new feature without going
+through the RFC process, it may be closed with a polite request to
+submit an RFC first.
+
+## Why do you need to do this
+
+It is great that you are considering suggesting new features or changes to Vue - we appreciate your willingness to contribute! However, as Vue becomes more widely used, we need to take stability more seriously, and thus have to carefully consider the impact of every change we make that may affect end users. On the other hand, we also feel that Vue has reached a stage where we want to start consciously preventing further complexity from new API surfaces.
+
+These constraints and tradeoffs may not be immediately obvious to users who are proposing a change just to solve a specific problem they just ran into. The RFC process serves as a way to guide you through our thought process when making changes to Vue, so that we can be on the same page when discussing why or why not these changes should be made.
+
+## Gathering feedback before submitting
+
+It's often helpful to get feedback on your concept before diving into the
+level of API design detail required for an RFC. **You may open an
+issue on this repo to start a high-level discussion**, with the goal of
+eventually formulating an RFC pull request with the specific implementation
+design.
+
+## What the process is
+
+In short, to get a major feature added to Vue, one must first get the
+RFC merged into the RFC repo as a markdown file. At that point the RFC
+is 'active' and may be implemented with the goal of eventual inclusion
+into Vue.
+
+* Fork the RFC repo http://github.com/vuejs/rfcs
+
+* Copy `0000-template.md` to `active-rfcs/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 [core team] will decide whether the RFC is a candidate
+for inclusion in Vue.
+
+* An RFC can be modified based upon feedback from the [core team] and community. Significant modifications may trigger a new final comment period.
+
+* An RFC may be rejected after public discussion has settled
+and comments have been made summarizing the rationale for rejection. A member of the [core team] should then close the RFC's associated pull request.
+
+* An RFC may be accepted at the close of its final comment period. A [core team] member will merge the RFC's associated pull request, at which point the RFC will become 'active'.
+
+## The RFC life-cycle
+
+Once an RFC becomes active then authors may implement it and submit the
+feature as a pull request to the Vue 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 RFC's can be done in followup PR's. 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.
+
+## Implementing an RFC
+
+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.
+
+An active RFC should have the link to the implementation PR listed if there is one. Feedback to the actual implementation should be conducted in the implementation PR instead of the original RFC PR.
+
+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).
+
+## Reviewing RFC's
+
+Members of the [core team] will attempt to review some set of open RFC
+pull requests on a regular basis. If a core team member believes an RFC PR is ready to be accepted into active status, they can approve the PR using GitHub's review feature to signal their approval of the RFC.
+
+**Vue's RFC process owes its inspiration to the [React RFC process], [Rust RFC process] and [Ember RFC process]**
+
+[React RFC process]: https://github.com/reactjs/rfcs
+[Rust RFC process]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs
+[Ember RFC process]: https://github.com/emberjs/rfcs
+[core team]: https://vuejs.org/v2/guide/team.html