Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
47 lines (37 loc) · 4.25 KB

File metadata and controls

47 lines (37 loc) · 4.25 KB
Error in user YAML: (<unknown>): mapping values are not allowed in this context at line 3 column 152
---
adr: <to be assigned>
title: <ADR title>
author: <a list of the author's or authors' name(s) and/or username(s), or name(s) and email(s), e.g. (use with the parentheses or triangular brackets): FirstName LastName (@GitHubUsername), FirstName LastName <foo@bar.com>, FirstName (@GitHubUsername) and GitHubUsername (@GitHubUsername)>
discussions-to: <URL>
status: Draft
type: <Standards Track (Accounts and State, Consensus, Crypto, EVM, Gateway)  | Informational | Meta>
category (*only required for Standard Track): <Accounts and State | Consensus | Crypto | EVM | Gateway>
created: <date created on, in ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd) format>
requires (*optional): <ADR number(s)>
replaces (*optional): <ADR number(s)>
---

This is the suggested template for new ADRs.

Note that an ADR number will be assigned by an editor. When opening a pull request to submit your ADR, please use an abbreviated title in the filename, adr-draft_title_abbrev.md.

The title should be 44 characters or less.

Simple Summary

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the ADR.

Abstract

A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.

Motivation

The motivation is critical for ADRs. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol is inadequate to address the problem that the ADR solves. ADR submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.

Specification

The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature.

Rationale

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. The rationale may also provide evidence of consensus within the community, and should discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.-->

Backwards Compatibility

All ADRs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The ADR must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. ADR submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.

Test Cases

Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for ADRs that are affecting consensus changes. Other ADRs can choose to include links to test cases if applicable.