-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge pull request #2 from asmeurer/sympep-1
SymPEP Purpose and Process and SymPEP Template
- Loading branch information
Showing
2 changed files
with
404 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,270 @@ | ||
# SymPEP 1 --- SymPEP Purpose and Process | ||
|
||
**Author** Aaron Meurer, Jason K. Moore | ||
**Status** Accepted | ||
**Type** Process | ||
**Created** 2021-01-27 | ||
**Resolution** | ||
|
||
## Abstract | ||
|
||
SymPEPs are a semi-formal process whereby important changes are proposed and | ||
discussed. Corresponding to each SymPEP is a document that outlines the | ||
proposed change(s), the discussion around those changes, and motivation for | ||
that change. This document outlines the details of the SymPEP process and | ||
corresponding documents. | ||
|
||
## What is a SymPEP? | ||
|
||
SymPEP stands for "SymPy Enhancement Proposal". SymPEPs represent a semi-formal | ||
process whereby important changes are proposed and discussed in the SymPy | ||
community. Corresponding to each SymPEP is a SymPEP document which outlines the | ||
proposal and corresponding discussion. SymPEPs are based on the | ||
[PEP](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/) process used by the Python language | ||
community to propose changes to the Python language. It also takes motivations | ||
from other similar processes in communities adjacent to SymPy, such as the | ||
[NEP](https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0000.html) process for NumPy and the | ||
[MEP](https://matplotlib.org/devel/MEP/index.html) process for Matplotlib. | ||
However, the SymPEP process differs from these processes in some ways, so those | ||
who may already be familiar with similar processes from other communities | ||
should read this document to understand how it works for SymPEPs. | ||
|
||
## Types | ||
|
||
There are two kinds of SymPEPs: | ||
|
||
A **Software Track** SymPEP describes a new feature or important change for the | ||
code in SymPy. | ||
|
||
A **Process** SymPEP describes a process related to SymPy, or proposes a | ||
change to (or an event in) a process. Process SymPEPs are like Software Track | ||
SymPEPs but apply to areas other than the SymPy library itself. They may | ||
propose an implementation, but not to SymPy’s codebase; they require community | ||
consensus. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the | ||
decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in SymPy | ||
development. Any meta-SymPEP is also considered a Process SymPEP. | ||
|
||
## Purpose | ||
|
||
The SymPEP process and corresponding documents serve several purposes: | ||
|
||
- To decide, as a community, whether a proposed change should be made. | ||
- To decide on the process by which a change will be implemented, for example, | ||
whether the change should be implemented in several stages, whether | ||
intermediate releases are required for things like deprecations, and so on. | ||
- To document the above discussions and decisions for future reference. | ||
- To document the motivations for a change from the perspective of end users | ||
who may be affected by it. Here "end users" means both users of the SymPy | ||
library, developers working on parts of SymPy itself which may be affected by | ||
the change, and developers of downstream libraries that depend on SymPy. | ||
|
||
Importantly, **a SymPEP is not documentation** for the proposed change. End | ||
user documentation should be included with the implementation of the feature in | ||
the corresponding SymPy documentation. This also means that other documentation | ||
should not rely primarily on cross-referencing a SymPEP as if it were | ||
documentation for a feature. Even technical discussion of a feature should be | ||
documented separately from a SymPEP. The reason is that SymPEPs will | ||
necessarily include details that are irrelevant to the final implementation, | ||
such as discussions of alternate implementations which were rejected and | ||
discussions of implementation of the change. | ||
|
||
## SymPEP Workflow | ||
|
||
Discussions around a proposed change typically begin informally on the mailing | ||
list or SymPy issue/pull-request tracker. However, once it is decided that the | ||
SymPEP process is desired for a change, the discussion should move to the | ||
[SymPEP repository](https://github.com/sympy/SymPEPs) on GitHub. | ||
|
||
Not all significant changes or additions to SymPy require a SymPEP. If the | ||
change would benefit from extended discussion or needs a roadmap for | ||
implementation, a SymPEP should be considered. If unsure, consult with the | ||
community on the currently active discussion forum. Most changes to and | ||
decisions regarding SymPy can be made through issues and pull requests, so it | ||
is best to start with one or the other. Examples of things that likely need a | ||
SymPEP are: major version changes (1.X.X -> 2.0), large breaks in backwards | ||
compatibility, adding new primary packages within SymPy, adding hard | ||
dependencies, introduction of development practices or tools all developers | ||
need to adopt, etc. Long term SymPy policies and goals should also be discussed | ||
and developed as SymPEPs. Statements of these policies and goals should be | ||
incorporated into the SymPy documentation, as determined in the associated | ||
SymPEP. | ||
|
||
Every SymPEP must have at least one champion. The champion(s) are persons who | ||
are responsible for writing the SymPEP, leading the discussions around it, and | ||
developing consensus around it. | ||
|
||
The author of a SymPEP should fork the repository and create a draft pull | ||
request with a new SymPEP document based on the [SymPEP | ||
template](SymPEP-template). The SymPEP document may be named `SymPEP-XXXX.md` | ||
until a number is assigned. Once the author completes all information in the | ||
template and would like it to be reviewed, one of the [core SymPy | ||
developers](https://github.com/orgs/sympy/teams/developers-with-push-access-to-everything) | ||
should decide if the proposal is a legitimate proposal and then assign a number | ||
to the SymPEP, in which case `XXXX` should be replaced with the number with | ||
leading 0s. The pull request can then be moved to an open pull request and is | ||
ready for community feedback and discussion but remains in draft status. The | ||
person who assigns the number should also update the | ||
[README](https://github.com/sympy/SymPEPs/blob/main/README.md) of the main | ||
[SymPEP repository](https://github.com/sympy/SymPEPs) to list that number. | ||
Numbers should be assigned to SymPEPs as soon as it is determined that they are | ||
a legitimate proposal. If a SymPEP is not deemed necessary, the author should | ||
rework the SymPEP or move it to a normal pull request or issue on the main | ||
SymPy repository. If a SymPEP ends up being rejected or postponed, it keeps its | ||
number, as rejection or postponement status is still a discussion that should | ||
be documented in the SymPEP. SymPEP numbers should generally be assigned in | ||
increasing numeric order. | ||
|
||
The author should announce the SymPEP on the mailing list when the number is | ||
assigned to encourage discussion. Discussion on the SymPEP should primarily | ||
continue on the open pull request but may also take place in other places, such | ||
as [GitHub discussions](https://github.com/sympy/SymPEPs/discussions) or the | ||
[mailing list](http://groups.google.com/group/sympy) with the latter being | ||
favored. All discussions should be cross-referenced in the "Discussions" | ||
section of the SymPEP document. | ||
|
||
For each SymPEP, the community should decide whether a draft implementation of | ||
the change is needed before acceptance or not. For instance, if a SymPEP | ||
concerns the details of how a feature is implemented, it should be accepted | ||
before that happens. On the other hand, the community may decide that it cannot | ||
come to a consensus about a SymPEP until a draft implementation is proposed. | ||
|
||
Once the community reaches a consensus about a SymPEP, the status of a SymPEP | ||
should be updated (see below). This consensus may be to accept or to reject | ||
the SymPEP, or to defer it. Here the "community" refers to the broader | ||
community that has a stake in the SymPEP, not just the core SymPy developers. | ||
The purpose of the SymPEP process is not to create a cabal of decision makers, | ||
but rather to enhance the involvement of the broader SymPy community in the | ||
decision making process. | ||
|
||
### Status | ||
|
||
The **status** section at the top of the SymPEP document (see the | ||
[template](SymPEP-template)) should be updated according to the current status | ||
of the SymPEP. Do not confuse this with the "draft/open pull request state on | ||
Github". | ||
|
||
All SymPEPs should be created with the **Draft** status. **Draft** status | ||
SymPEPs generally live in a pull request. | ||
|
||
Eventually, after discussion, there may be a consensus that the SymPEP should | ||
be accepted; see the next section for details. At this point the status becomes | ||
**Accepted**. | ||
|
||
Once a SymPEP has been **Accepted**, the reference implementation must be | ||
completed. When the reference implementation is complete and incorporated into | ||
the main source code repository, the status will be changed to **Final**. | ||
|
||
A SymPEP can also be assigned status **Deferred**. The SymPEP author or a core | ||
developer can assign the SymPEP this status when no progress is being made on | ||
the SymPEP. | ||
|
||
A SymPEP 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 SymPEP author themselves has | ||
decided that the SymPEP is actually a bad idea or has accepted that a competing | ||
proposal is a better alternative. | ||
|
||
SymPEPs can also be **Superseded** by a different SymPEP, rendering the | ||
original obsolete. | ||
|
||
Process SymPEPs may also have a status of **Active** if they are never meant to | ||
be completed, e.g. SymPEP 1 (this SymPEP). | ||
|
||
### Merging the SymPEP Document Pull Request | ||
|
||
Whenever a SymPEP moves from the **Draft** status to one of the other above | ||
statuses, the header should be updated, and the corresponding pull request | ||
should be merged. This way the document lives inside of the SymPEP repository | ||
proper. SymPEPs that are merged are not set in stone, and may be updated by | ||
future pull requests (although SymPEPs that are **Accepted** should generally | ||
not be significantly modified once they have reached that status). The purpose | ||
of merging is simply to make the SymPEP visible in the repository, even if it | ||
isn't yet accepted or rejected. SymPEP discussions that have stalled should | ||
also be merged, so that the SymPEP becomes visible in the SymPEP repository | ||
proper—again, discussion may be picked up again with a new pull request. | ||
|
||
### Accepting a SymPEP | ||
|
||
Once a SymPEP is Accepted by consensus of all interested contributors, an email | ||
should be sent to the [SymPy mailing | ||
list](http://groups.google.com/group/sympy) with a subject like: | ||
|
||
Proposal to accept SymPEP #<number>: <title> | ||
|
||
In the body of your email, you should: | ||
|
||
- link to the latest version of the SymPEP, | ||
|
||
- briefly describe any major points of contention and how they were resolved, | ||
|
||
- include a sentence like: "If there are no substantive objections within 7 | ||
days from this email, then the SymPEP will be accepted; see SymPEP 1 for more | ||
details." | ||
|
||
After you send the email, add the email thread to the Discussion section of the | ||
SymPEP, so that people can find it later. | ||
|
||
Generally the SymPEP author will be the one to send this email, but anyone can | ||
do it. The important thing is to make sure that everyone knows when a SymPEP is | ||
on the verge of acceptance, and give them a final chance to respond. If there's | ||
some special reason to extend this final comment period beyond 7 days, then | ||
that's fine, just say so in the email. It shouldn't be less than 7 days, | ||
because sometimes people are traveling or similar and need some time to | ||
respond. | ||
|
||
In general, the goal is to make sure that the community has consensus, not | ||
provide a rigid policy for people to try to game. When in doubt, err on the | ||
side of asking for more feedback and looking for opportunities to compromise. | ||
|
||
It is also important that SymPEPs are a mechanism to enable change as opposed | ||
to hindering and slowing change. The general approach of reviewers should be to | ||
help the author get it to a state that can be accepted or by offering | ||
alternative proposals. SymPEPs shouldn't be the place where energy and ideas | ||
die. | ||
|
||
If the final comment period passes without any substantive objections, then | ||
the SymPEP can officially be marked **Accepted**. A followup email should then | ||
be sent notifying the list. Update the SymPEP by setting its **Status** to | ||
**Accepted**, and its **Resolution** header to a link to your followup email. | ||
The SymPEP pull request should be merged at this time, if it hasn't been | ||
already, so that it is visible in the SymPEP repository proper. | ||
|
||
If there are substantive objections, then the SymPEP remains in Draft state, | ||
discussion continues as normal, and it can be proposed for acceptance again | ||
later once the objections are resolved. | ||
|
||
### SymPEP Steps | ||
|
||
This describes the general set of steps for a SymPEP: | ||
|
||
- From a discussion in the mailing list, an issue or PR, someone might suggest | ||
a SymPEP being needed. | ||
- If discussion did not start on the mailing list, then move to the mailing | ||
list (with cross-reference links) to gauge whether a SymPEP is appropriate to | ||
pursue. | ||
- If it seems appropriate, make a draft pull request with your SymPEP. When your | ||
draft is ready for a review, request a number assignment on the pull request. | ||
- A core developer other than the author(s) assigns the number and opens the | ||
pull request (out of Github draft state). | ||
- Announce on the mailing list that the SymPEP is ready for review and | ||
discussion. Suggest the primary forum for detailed discussion. | ||
- Detailed discussion takes place in the designated forum until consensus of | ||
those participating is reached. | ||
- Once reached, announce the final draft of SymPEP on the mailing list and then | ||
it can be 7 days or perhaps longer, if indicated, for anyone to object. | ||
- After the objection period, the status of the SymPEP is set to "Accepted" and | ||
a core developer merges the pull request. | ||
- After implementation of the software changes or process changes, update the | ||
SymPEP status to "Final". | ||
|
||
Deferment, rejection, or deemed inappropriate steps may occur along the way. | ||
|
||
## Discussion | ||
|
||
- [Initial mailing list post proposing | ||
SymPEPs](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sympy/5RVMiWuCjoA/lr64dS1BBAAJ) | ||
- [sympy/SymPEPs#2](https://github.com/sympy/SymPEPs/pull/2) | ||
|
||
## Copyright | ||
|
||
This document has been placed in the public domain. |
Oops, something went wrong.