Project: Operator Framework (App Definition and Development / Application Definition & Image Build)
File: TEMPLATE.md

title: Neat-proposals-Idea authors: "@janedoe" reviewers: TBD "@alicedoe" approvers: TBD "@oscardoe" creation-date: yyyy-mm-dd last-updated: yyyy-mm-dd status: provisional|implementable|implemented|deferred|rejected|withdrawn|replaced see-also: "/proposals/this-other-neat-thing.md" replaces: "/proposals/that-less-than-great-idea.md" superseded-by: "/proposals/our-past-effort.md" This is the title of the enhancement. Keep it simple and descriptive. A good title can help communicate what the enhancement is and should be considered as part of any review. To get started with this template: Pick a domain. Find the appropriate domain to discuss your enhancement. Make a copy of this template. Copy this template into the directory for the domain. Fill out the "overview" sections. This includes the Summary and Motivation sections. These should be easy and explain why the community should desire this enhancement. Create a PR. Assign it to folks with expertise in that domain to help sponsor the process. Merge at each milestone. Merge when the design is able to transition to a new status (provisional, implementable, implemented, etc.). View anything marked as `provisional` as an idea worth exploring in the future, but not accepted as ready to execute. Anything marked as `implementable` should clearly communicate how an enhancement is coded up and delivered. If an enhancement describes a new deployment topology or platform, include a logical description for the deployment, and how it handles the unique aspects of the platform. Aim for single topic PRs to keep discussions focused. If you disagree with what is already in a document, open a new PR with suggested changes. The `Metadata` section above is intended to support the creation of tooling around the enhancement process. \[ \] Enhancement is `implementable` \[ \] Design details are appropriately documented from clear requirements \[ \] Test plan is defined \[ \] Graduation criteria for dev preview, tech preview, GA \ This is where to call out areas of the design that require closure before deciding to implement the design. For instance, > 1. This requires exposing previously private resources which contain sensitive information. Can we do this? The `Summary` section is incredibly important for producing high quality user-focused documentation such as release notes or a development roadmap. It should be possible to collect this information before implementation begins in order to avoid requiring implementors to split their attention between writing release notes and implementing the feature itself. A good summary is probably at least a paragraph in length. This section is for explicitly listing the motivation, goals and non-goals of this proposal. Describe why the change is important and the benefits to users. List the specific goals of the proposal. How will we know that this has succeeded? What is out of scope for this proposal? Listing non-goals helps to focus discussion and make progress. This is where we get down to the nitty gritty of what the proposal actually is. Detail the things that people will be able to do if this is implemented. Include as much detail as possible so that people can understand the "how" of the system. The goal here is to make this feel real for users without getting bogged down. What are the caveats to the implementation? What are some important details that didn't come across above. Go in to as much detail as necessary here. This might be a good place to talk about core concepts and how they releate. What are the risks of this proposal and how do we mitigate. Think

For example, consider both security and how this will impact the larger OKD ecosystem. How will security be reviewed and by whom? How will UX be reviewed and by whom? Consider including folks that also work outside your immediate sub-project. Note: Section not required until targeted at a release. Consider the following in developing a test plan for this enhancement: Will there be e2e and integration tests, in addition to unit tests? How will it be tested in isolation vs with other components? No need to outline all of the test cases, just the general strategy. Anything that would count as tricky in the implementation and anything particularly challenging to test should be called out. All code is expected to have adequate tests (eventually with coverage expectations). Note: Section not required until targeted at a release. Define graduation milestones. These may be defined in terms of API maturity, or as something else. Initial proposal should keep this high-level with a focus on what signals will be looked at to determine graduation. Consider the following in developing the graduation criteria for this enhancement: Maturity levels - `Dev Preview`, `Tech Preview`, `GA` Deprecation Clearly define what graduation means. These are generalized examples to consider, in addition to the aforementioned maturity levels(`Dev Preview`, `Tech Preview`, `GA`). Ability to utilize the enhancement end to end End user documentation, relative API stability Sufficient test coverage Gather feedback from users rather than just developers More testing (upgrade, downgrade, scale) Sufficient time for feedback Available by default For non-optional features moving to GA, the graduation criteria must include end to end tests. Announce deprecation and support policy of the existing feature Deprecate the feature If applicable, how will the component be upgraded and downgraded? Make sure this is in the test plan. Consider the following in developing an upgrade/downgrade strategy for this enhancement: What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing cluster required to make on upgrade in order to keep previous behavior? What changes (in invocations, configurations, API use, etc.) is an existing cluster required to make on upgrade in order to make use of the enhancement? How will the component handle version skew with other components? What are the guarantees? Make sure this is in the test plan. Consider the following in developing a version skew strategy for this enhancement: During an upgrade, we will always have skew among components, how will this impact your work? Does this enhancement involve coordinating behavior in the control plane and in the kubelet? How does an n-2 kubelet without this feature available behave when this feature is used? Will any other components on the node change? For example, changes to CSI, CRI or CNI may require updating that component before the kubelet. Major milestones in the life cycle of a proposal should be tracked in `Implementation History`. The idea is to find the best form of an argument why this enhancement should not be implemented. Similar to the `Drawbacks` section the `Alternatives` section is used to highlight and record other possible approaches to delivering the value proposed by an enhancement. Use this section if you need things from the project. Examples include a new subproject, repos requested, github details, and/or testing infrastructure. Listing these here allows the community to get the process for these resources started right away.