Pointers to v1 in timeline for committed RFCs

Signed-off-by: Adrian Palacios <[email protected]>
cedar-policy · Nov 27, 2024 · 33cd951 · 33cd951
1 parent 9658367
commit 33cd951
Show file tree

Hide file tree

Showing 19 changed files with 38 additions and 0 deletions.
diff --git a/text/0005-is-operator.md b/text/0005-is-operator.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2023-11-08 on `main`
 - Released: 2023-12-15 in `cedar-policy` v3.0.0
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes to add an `is` operator to the Cedar language that allows users to check the type of entities.

diff --git a/text/0019-stricter-validation.md b/text/0019-stricter-validation.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2023-09-08 on `main`
 - Released: 2023-12-15 in `cedar-policy` v3.0.0
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Internally, strict validation of a policy is implemented as 1/ checking and transforming the policy using a _permissive_ validation mode; 2/ annotating the transformed policy with types, and 3/ checking the types against more restrictive rules. We would like to be able to at least _explain_ strict mode independently of permissive mode, but there is no easy way to do that. This RFC proposes to separate strict mode from permissive mode, making the implementation simpler and more understandable/explainable, though somewhat more strict.

diff --git a/text/0020-unique-record-keys.md b/text/0020-unique-record-keys.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2023-10-24 on `main`
 - Released: 2023-12-15 in `cedar-policy` v3.0.0
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Today, Cedar allows duplicate keys in record literals (and other record values, including `context`), with last-value-wins semantics.

diff --git a/text/0021-any-and-all-operators.md b/text/0021-any-and-all-operators.md
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
 - Accepted: 2023-11-08 (but later rejected, see below)
 - Rejected: 2024-05-21
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes extending the language with `all?` and `any?` operators that allow checking if all elements or any element in a set satisfies a given predicate. The `all?` operator returns `true` if the provided predicate is true for all elements in the set. The `any?` operator returns true if the predicate is true for any element in the set.

diff --git a/text/0024-schema-syntax.md b/text/0024-schema-syntax.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2024-02-19 on `main` ([#557](https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar/pull/557))
 - Released: 2024-03-08 in `cedar-policy` v3.1.0
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This document proposes a custom syntax for Cedar schemas. The syntax was developed with the following goals in mind:

diff --git a/text/0032-port-formalization-to-lean.md b/text/0032-port-formalization-to-lean.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2023-10-26 on `main`
 - Released: The Dafny formalization was deprecated in `cedar-spec` v3.1.0 (released 2024-03-08)
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes to port our current Cedar models and proofs (written in [Dafny](https://dafny.org/)) to an alternative verification tool ([Lean](https://lean-lang.org/)) that is better suited for meta-theory proofs, like Cedar’s validation soundness proof.

diff --git a/text/0034-precomputed-entity-attributes.md b/text/0034-precomputed-entity-attributes.md
@@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
 - Landed: 2023-11-16 on `main`
 - Released: 2023-12-15 in `cedar-policy` v3.0.0
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Internally, Cedar entity objects will store their attribute values as

diff --git a/text/0048-schema-annotations.md b/text/0048-schema-annotations.md
@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@
 
 - Started: 2024-02-05
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Like Cedar policies, users may want to associate arbitrary, machine readable metadata with Schema objects.

diff --git a/text/0052-reserved-namespaces.md b/text/0052-reserved-namespaces.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2024-07-15 on `main` ([#969](https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar/pull/969))
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC extends the reservation of the `__cedar` namespace in schema in [RFC24](https://github.com/cedar-policy/rfcs/blob/main/text/0024-schema-syntax.md) and

diff --git a/text/0053-enum-entities.md b/text/0053-enum-entities.md
@@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
 - Landed: TBD
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Extend schemas to support declared enumerations of entity-typed values, analogous to how schemas can currently be used to enumerate a finite list of `Action`-typed values.

diff --git a/text/0055-remove-unspecified.md b/text/0055-remove-unspecified.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2024-06-19 on `main` ([#983](https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar/pull/983))
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Cedar currently supports _unspecified entities_, which are entities of a special, unique type that have no attributes, and are not ancestors or descendants of any other entity in the store. Unspecified entities are intended to act as placeholders for entities that don’t influence authorization (see examples below).

diff --git a/text/0057-general-multiplication.md b/text/0057-general-multiplication.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2024-03-20 in `cedar-policy`
 - Released: 2024-03-29 in `cedar-policy` v3.1.2
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Allow multiplication of arbitrary expressions (that evaluate to Long), not just

diff --git a/text/0062-extended-has.md b/text/0062-extended-has.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: TBD
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes to extend the syntax of the `has` operator to check for the presence of all attributes in an access path.

diff --git a/text/0068-entity-tags.md b/text/0068-entity-tags.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Accepted: 2024-07-26
 - Rejected: 2024-09-11; see RFC 82
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes to extend the Cedar type system with the ability to include _embedded attribute maps_ (EA-maps for short) in entity types, with the primary goal of supporting a full-featured encoding for _tags_. For evaluation purposes, EA-maps have the same programming interface as records: keys are like record attributes and values are like attribute values. The difference is in how they are validated: the keys of EA-maps need not be enumerated in advance, as is required with record attributes, and all values must have the same type. Moreover, EA-maps are treated by the validator as second-class, meaning valid usage scenarios are somewhat restricted.

diff --git a/text/0070-disallow-empty-namespace-shadowing.md b/text/0070-disallow-empty-namespace-shadowing.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: 2024-08-26 on `main` ([#1147](https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar/pull/1147))
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 In schemas, disallow definitions of entity types, common types, and actions that

diff --git a/text/0071-trailing-commas.md b/text/0071-trailing-commas.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: TBD
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 The Cedar grammar (both policies and schemas) should accept trailing

diff --git a/text/0076-entity-slice-validation.md b/text/0076-entity-slice-validation.md
@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@
 
 * Started: 2024-08-01
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC introduces "Entity Slicing Validation" (ESV), which consists of

diff --git a/text/0080-datetime-extension.md b/text/0080-datetime-extension.md
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
 - Landed: TBD
 - Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 Cedar currently supports extension functions for IP addresses and decimal values.

diff --git a/text/0082-entity-tags.md b/text/0082-entity-tags.md
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@
 * Landed: TBD
 * Released: TBD
 
+Note: These statuses are based on [the first version of the RFC process](./../archive/process-v1/README.md).
+
 ## Summary
 
 This RFC proposes to extend the Cedar language, type system, and symbolic analysis to include full-featured *entity tags* for entity types. Tags are a mechanism used by cloud services to attach key-value pairs to resources. Cedar will allow them to be attached to any entities (not just resources).