The wikis are now using the new authentication system.
If you did not migrate your account yet, visit https://idp-portal-info.suse.com/
If you did not migrate your account yet, visit https://idp-portal-info.suse.com/
__________________________________________________________________ OSEP: 0001 Title: Process proposal: openSUSE Enhancement Proposal Version: 0.1 Last-Modified: 10 Dec 2013 Author: Jos Poortvliet <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Antonio Larrosa <email@example.com> Status: Draft Type: Process Created: 02 Dec 2013 Post-History: _____________________________________________________________________ Process proposal: openSUSE Enhancement Proposal ----------------------------------------------- OSEP (_openSUSE Enhancement Proposal_) is a document providing information to the openSUSE community or describing a process in Factory or its environment. The OSEP should provide a concise specification and rationale of the process it's explaining. OSEPs are intended to be the primary mechanisms for proposing major new procedures and for documenting the design decisions that have gone into Factory. The OSEP author is responsible for building consensus within the community and documenting dissenting opinions. Because the OSEPs are maintained as text files in a versioned repository, their revision history is the historical record of each proposal footnoteref:[note_repo, https://www.github.com/TBD]. OSEP Types ---------- There are two kinds of OSEP: - An _Informational OSEP_ describes an issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the openSUSE developers, but does not propose a new feature. Informational OSEPs do not necessarily represent a community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementers are free to ignore Informational OSEPs or follow their advice. - A _Process OSEP_ describes a process surrounding Factory, or proposes a change to a process. They may propose an implementation, but not to packages; they often require community consensus; unlike Informational OSEPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Factory development. Submitting an OSEP ------------------ The OSEP process begins with a new idea for openSUSE. It is highly recommended that a single OSEP contain a single key proposal or new idea. Small enhancements or patches don't need an OSEP. It's recommended that the author of an OSEP brings his/her idea to key people from the community to see the acceptance the idea would have before sending it for review. The received feedback should be introduced in the first draft document, so that it's as complete as possible and long open-ended discussions on public mailing lists are avoided. Once a draft is written in the style described below, it should be presented to the _opensuse-factory_ mailing list. OSEPs should be submitted in asciidoc format footnoteref:[asciidoc_userguide, http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/userguide.html] with UTF-8 codification. OSEPs may include auxiliary files such as diagrams. Such files must be named +osep-XXXX-Y.ext+, where _XXXX_ is the OSEP number, _Y_ is a serial number (starting at 1), and _ext_ is replaced by the actual file extension (e.g. +png+). OSEP Review & Resolution ------------------------ Once an author has completed an OSEP, it will be reviewed and discussed at the Factory mailing list, who will find a consensus to accept or reject it. Once an OSEP has been accepted, the enhancement has to be implemented. Once this implementation is complete and accepted, the status will be changed to _Final_. An OSEP can also be assigned status _Deferred_. The OSEP author (or in his/her abscense, the Factory maintainers) can assign the OSEP this status when no progress is being made for some time. After an OSEP is deferred, it can be re-assigned to draft status. An OSEP can also be _Rejected_. Perhaps after all is said and done it was not a good idea. It is still important to have a record of this fact. The _Withdrawn_ status is similar - it means that the OSEP author themselves has decided that the OSEP is actually a bad idea, or has accepted that a competing proposal is a better alternative. OSEPs can also be superseded by a different OSEP, rendering the original obsolete (where version 2 of a policy, for example, might replace version 1). The possible paths of the status of OSEPs are as follows: image::osep-0001-1.png[OSEP workflow] Some Informational and Process OSEPs may also have a status of _Active_ if they are never meant to be completed. E.g. OSEP-0001 (this OSEP). What belongs in a successful OSEP? ---------------------------------- Each OSEP should have the following parts: - *Preamble* -- RFC 822 style headers containing meta-data about the OSEP, including the OSEP number, a short descriptive title (limited to a maximum of 44 characters), the names, and optionally the contact info for each author, etc. - *Abstract* -- a short (~200 word) description of the issue being addressed. - *Copyright/public domain* -- Each OSEP must either be explicitly labeled as placed in the public domain (see this OSEP as an example) or licensed under the Open Publication License footnoteref:[note_openpub_license, http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/]. - *Specification* -- The technical specification should describe the specific areas of openSUSE that would be touched by this OSEP. If new functionality is being introduced, what packages will that functionality affect? If new policy, who will be affected? - *Motivation and Rationale* -- The motivation is critical for OSEPs that want to modify the openSUSE distribution. It should clearly explain why the existing policies are inadequate to address the problem that the OSEP solves. OSEP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright. + The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the enhancement has been done in other distributions. OSEP Header Preamble -------------------- Each OSEP must begin with an RFC 822 style header preamble. The headers must appear in the following order. Headers marked with "*" are optional and are described below. All other headers are required. _____________________________________________________________________ OSEP: <OSEP number> Title: <OSEP title> Version: <version string> Last-Modified: <date string> Author: <list of authors' real names and optionally, email addrs> Status: <Draft | Active | Accepted | Deferred | Rejected | Withdrawn | Final | Superseded> Type: <Informational | Process> Created: <date created on, in dd-mmm-yyyy format> Post-History: <dates of postings to opensuse-factory> * Replaces: <OSEP number> * Superseded-By: <OSEP number> ______________________________________________________________________ The +Author+ header lists the names, and optionally the email addresses of all the authors/owners of the OSEP. The format of the Author header value must be Random J. User <firstname.lastname@example.org> if the email address is included, and just Random J. User if the address is not given. If there are multiple authors, each should be on a separate line following RFC 2822 continuation line conventions. Note that personal email addresses in OSEPs will be obscured as a defense against spam harvesters. The +Type+ header specifies the type of OSEP: +Informational+, or +Process+. The +Created+ header records the date that the OSEP was assigned a number, while +Post-History+ is used to record the dates of when new versions of the OSEP were posted to _opensuse-factory_ and/or _opensuse-project_. Both headers should be in _dd-mmm-yyyy_ format, e.g. _14-Aug-2001_. OSEPs may also have a +Superseded-By+ header indicating that an OSEP has been rendered obsolete by a later document; the value is the number of the OSEP that replaces the current document. The newer OSEP must have a +Replaces+ header containing the number of the OSEP that it rendered obsolete. Reporting OSEP Bugs, or Submitting OSEP Updates ----------------------------------------------- For the early draft stages of the OSEP, it's best to send comments and changes directly to the OSEP author. For more mature, or finished OSEPs corrections should be submitted to openSUSE's bugzilla footnoteref:[note_bnc, https://bugzilla.novell.com/] so that changes don't get lost. Transferring OSEP Ownership --------------------------- The Factory maintainers can transfer the ownership of an OSEP to another author if the original author does no longer have the time or interest in updating it or follow through with the OSEP process. Credits ------- The OSEP concept, and, in fact, much of the text of this document, is liberally stolen from Python's PEP-0001 footnote:[http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/] (by Barry A. Warsaw, Jeremy Hylton, and David Goodger) and from Gentoo's GLEP-0001 footnote:[http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0001.html] (by Grant Goodyear). Copyright --------- This document has been placed in the public domain.