zecfoundation
/
zips
mirror of https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zips.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity
zips/zip-0000.rst

638 lines
27 KiB
ReStructuredText
Raw Permalink Blame History

::
ZIP: 0
Title: ZIP Process
Owners: Daira Hopwood <daira@electriccoin.co>
Deirdre Connolly <deirdre@zfnd.org>
Original-Authors: Daira Hopwood
Josh Cincinnati
George Tankersley
Credits: Luke Dashjr
Status: Active
Category: Process
Created: 2019-02-16
License: BSD-2-Clause
Terminology
===========
The key words "MUST", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", "RECOMMENDED",
"OPTIONAL", and "REQUIRED" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in RFC 2119. [#RFC2119]_
The term "network upgrade" in this document is to be interpreted as
described in ZIP 200. [#zip-0200]_
Abstract
========
A Zcash Improvement Proposal (ZIP) is a design document providing
information to the Zcash community, or describing a new feature for
Zcash or its processes or environment. The ZIP should provide a concise
technical specification of the feature and a rationale for the feature.
We intend ZIPs to be the primary mechanism for proposing new features,
for collecting community input on an issue, and for documenting the
design decisions that have gone into Zcash. The Owner(s) of the ZIP
(usually the authors(s)) are responsible for building consensus within
the community and documenting dissenting opinions.
Because the ZIPs are maintained as text files in a versioned repository,
their revision history is the historical record of the feature proposal.
This document is based partly on the work done by Luke Dashjr with
`BIP 2 <https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki>`__.
ZIP Workflow
============
The ZIP process begins with a new idea for Zcash. Each potential ZIP
must have Owners — one or more people who write the ZIP using the style
and format described below, shepherd the discussions in the appropriate
forums, and attempt to build community consensus around the idea. The
ZIP Owners should first attempt to ascertain whether the idea is ZIP-able.
Small enhancements or patches to a particular piece of software often
don't require standardisation between multiple projects; these don't
need a ZIP and should be injected into the relevant project-specific
development workflow with a patch submission to the applicable issue
tracker. Additionally, many ideas have been brought forward for changing
Zcash that have been rejected for various reasons. The first step should
be to search past discussions to see if an idea has been considered
before, and if so, what issues arose in its progression. After
investigating past work, the best way to proceed is by posting about the
new idea to the `Zcash Community Forum <https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/>`__.
Vetting an idea publicly before going as far as writing a ZIP is meant
to save both the potential Owners and the wider community time. Asking
the Zcash community first if an idea is original helps prevent too much
time being spent on something that is guaranteed to be rejected based on
prior discussions (searching the internet does not always do the trick).
It also helps to make sure the idea is applicable to the entire
community and not just the Owners. Just because an idea sounds good to
the Owners does not mean it will work for most people in most areas
where Zcash is used.
Once the Owners have asked the Zcash community as to whether an idea
has any chance of acceptance, a draft ZIP should be presented to the
`Zcash Community Forum <https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/>`__.
This gives the Owners a chance to flesh out the draft ZIP to make it
properly formatted, of high quality, and to address additional concerns
about the proposal. Following a discussion, the proposal should be
submitted to the `ZIPs git repository <https://github.com/zcash/zips>`__
as a pull request. This draft must be written in ZIP style as described
below, and named with an alias such as
``zip-zatoshizakamoto-42millionzec`` until the ZIP Editors have assigned
it a ZIP number (Owners MUST NOT self-assign ZIP numbers).
ZIP Owners are responsible for collecting community feedback on both
the initial idea and the ZIP before submitting it for review. However,
wherever possible, long open-ended discussions on forums should be avoided.
It is highly recommended that a single ZIP contain a single key proposal
or new idea. The more focused the ZIP, the more successful it tends to
be. If in doubt, split your ZIP into several well-focused ones.
When the ZIP draft is complete, the ZIP Editors will assign the ZIP a
number (if that has not already been done) and one or more Categories,
and merge the pull request to the ZIPs git repository. The ZIP Editors
will not unreasonably reject a ZIP. Reasons for rejecting ZIPs include
duplication of effort, disregard for formatting rules, being too
unfocused or too broad, being technically unsound, not providing proper
motivation or not in keeping with the Zcash philosophy. For a ZIP to be
accepted it must meet certain minimum criteria. It must be a clear and
complete description of the proposed enhancement. The enhancement must
represent a net improvement. The proposed implementation, if applicable,
must be solid and must not complicate the protocol unduly.
The ZIP Owners may update the draft as necessary in the git repository.
Updates to drafts should also be submitted by the Owners as pull requests.
ZIP Numbering Conventions
-------------------------
The ZIP Editors currently use the following conventions when numbering
ZIPs:
* if a ZIP directly corresponds to a BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal),
and the number doesn't clash, assign the same number;
* if it affects the consensus layer or the core protocol, assign a
number in the range 200..299;
* if it affects only higher layers but is needed for interoperability
between node implementations or other parts of the ecosystem, assign
a number in the range 300..399;
* if it is specific to an implementation (e.g. zcashd or zebra), assign
a number in the range 400..499;
* try to number ZIPs that should or will be deployed together
consecutively (subject to the above conventions), and in a coherent
reading order.
These conventions are subject to change by consensus of the ZIP Editors.
Transferring ZIP Ownership
--------------------------
It occasionally becomes necessary to transfer ownership of ZIPs to a new
Owner. In general, we'd like to retain the original Owner as a
co-Owner of the transferred ZIP, but that's really up to the original
Owner. A good reason to transfer ownership is because the original
Owner no longer has the time or interest in updating it or following
through with the ZIP process, or has fallen off the face of the 'net
(i.e. is unreachable or not responding to email). A bad reason to
transfer ownership is because you don't agree with the direction of the
ZIP. We try to build consensus around a ZIP, but if that's not possible,
you can always submit a competing ZIP.
If you are interested in assuming ownership of a ZIP, send a message
asking to take over, addressed to both the original Owner and the ZIP
Editors. If the original Owner doesn't respond to email in a timely
manner, the ZIP Editors will make a unilateral decision (it's not like
such decisions can't be reversed :).
If an author of a ZIP is no longer an Owner, an Original-Authors field
SHOULD be added to the ZIP metadata indicating the original authorship,
unless the original author(s) request otherwise.
ZIP Editors
-----------
The current ZIP Editors are Daira Hopwood, representing the Electric Coin
Company, and Deirdre Connolly, representing the Zcash Foundation. Both
can be reached at zips@z.cash . The current design of the ZIP Process
dictates that there are always at least two ZIP Editors: one from the
Electric Coin Company and one from the Zcash Foundation. Additional Editors may
be selected by consensus among the current Editors.
ZIP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow
--------------------------------------
The ZIP Editors subscribe to the `Zcash Community Forum.
<https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/>`__
For each new ZIP that comes in an Editor confirms the following:
* Read the ZIP to check if it is ready: sound and complete. The ideas
must make technical sense, even if they don't seem likely to be
accepted.
* The title should accurately describe the content.
* The ZIP draft must have been sent to the Zcash Community Forum or as
a PR to the `ZIPs git repository <https://github.com/zcash/zips>`__
* Motivation and backward compatibility (when applicable) must be
addressed.
* The licensing terms are acceptable for ZIPs.
If the ZIP isn't ready, the editor will send it back to the Owners for
revision, with specific instructions.
Once the ZIP is ready for the repository it SHOULD be submitted as a
"pull request" to the `ZIPs git repository <https://github.com/zcash/zips>`__
where it may get further feedback. It SHOULD NOT contain a ZIP number
unless one had already been assigned by the ZIP Editors. The pull
request SHOULD initially be marked as a Draft.
The ZIP Editors will:
* Assign a ZIP number in the pull request.
* Remove Draft status and merge the pull request when it is ready.
The ZIP editors monitor ZIP changes and update ZIP headers as
appropriate.
The ZIP Editors MAY reject a proposed ZIP or update to an existing ZIP
for any of the following reasons:
* it violates the Zcash Code of Conduct [#conduct]_ ;
* it appears too unfocused or broad;
* it duplicates effort in other ZIPs without sufficient technical justification
(however, alternative proposals to address similar or overlapping problems
are not excluded for this reason);
* it has manifest security flaws (including being unrealistically dependent
on user vigilance to avoid security weaknesses);
* it disregards compatibility with the existing Zcash blockchain or ecosystem;
* it is manifestly unimplementable;
* it includes buggy code, pseudocode, or algorithms;
* it manifestly violates common expectations of a significant portion of the
Zcash community;
* it updates a Draft ZIP to Released when there is significant community
opposition to its content (however, Draft ZIPs explicitly may describe
proposals to which there is, or could be expected, significant community
opposition);
* in the case of a Released ZIP, the update makes a substantive change to
which there is significant community opposition;
* it is dependent on a patent that could potentially be an obstacle to
adoption of the ZIP;
* it includes commercial advertising or spam;
* it disregards formatting rules;
* it makes non-editorial edits to previous entries in a ZIP's Change history,
if there is one;
* an update to an existing ZIP extends or changes its scope to an extent
that would be better handled as a separate ZIP;
* a new ZIP has been proposed for a category that does not reflect its content,
or an update would change a ZIP to an inappropriate category;
* it updates a Released ZIP to Draft when the specification is already
implemented and has been in common use;
* it violates any specific "MUST" or "MUST NOT" rule in this document;
* the expressed political views of a Owner of the document are inimical
to the Zcash Code of Conduct [#conduct]_ (except in the case of an update
removing that Owner);
* it is not authorized by the stated ZIP Owners;
* it removes an Owner without their consent (unless the reason for removal
is directly related to a breach of the Code of Conduct by that Owner).
The ZIP Editors MUST NOT unreasonably deny publication of a ZIP proposal
or update that does not violate any of these criteria. If they refuse a
proposal or update, they MUST give an explanation of which of the
criteria were violated, with the exception that spam may be deleted
without an explanation.
Note that it is not the primary responsibility of the ZIP Editors to
review proposals for security, correctness, or implementability.
Please send all ZIP-related communications either by email to
<zips@z.cash>, or by opening an issue on the `ZIPs issue
tracker <https://github.com/zcash/zips/issues>`__. All communications
should abide by the Zcash Code of Conduct [#conduct]_
and follow `the GNU Kind Communication
Guidelines <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html>`__
ZIP format and structure
========================
ZIPs SHOULD be written in reStructuredText [#rst]_, Markdown [#markdown]_,
or LaTeX [#latex]_. For ZIPs written in LaTeX, a ``Makefile`` MUST be
provided to build (at least) a PDF version of the document.
Each ZIP SHOULD have the following parts:
* Preamble — Headers containing metadata about the ZIP (`see
below <#zip-header-preamble>`__).
The License field of the preamble indicates the licensing terms,
which MUST be acceptable according to `the ZIP licensing requirements <#zip-licensing>`__.
* Terminology — Definitions of technical or non-obvious terms used
in the document.
* Abstract — A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue
being addressed.
* Motivation — The motivation is critical for ZIPs that want to change
the Zcash protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing
protocol is inadequate to address the problem that the ZIP solves.
* Specification — The technical specification should describe the
interface and semantics of any new feature. The specification should be
detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for
any of the current Zcash platforms.
* 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 should provide evidence of
consensus within the community and discuss important objections or
concerns raised during discussion.
* Security and privacy considerations — If applicable, security
and privacy considerations should be explicitly described, particularly
if the ZIP makes explicit trade-offs or assumptions. For guidance on
this section consider RFC 3552 [#RFC3552]_ as a starting point.
* Reference implementation — Literal code implementing the ZIP's
specification, and/or a link to the reference implementation of
the ZIP's specification. The reference implementation MUST be
completed before any ZIP is given status “Implemented” or “Final”,
but it generally need not be completed before the ZIP is accepted
into “Proposed”.
ZIP header preamble
-------------------
Each ZIP MUST begin with a RFC 822-style header preamble. For ZIPs written
in reStructuredText, this is represented as ``::`` on the first line,
followed by a blank line, then the preamble indented by 2 spaces.
The following header fields are REQUIRED::
ZIP:
Title:
Owners:
Status:
Category:
Created:
License:
The following additional header fields are OPTIONAL::
Credits:
Original-Authors:
Discussions-To:
Pull-Request:
Obsoleted by:
Updated by:
Obsoletes:
Updates:
The Owners header lists the names and email addresses of all the
Owners of the ZIP. The format of the Owners header value SHOULD be::
Random J. User <address@dom.ain>
If there are multiple Owners, each should be on a separate line.
The "Owners", "Credits", and "Original-Authors" headers always use
these plural spellings even there is only one Owner, one person to be
credited, or one original author.
While a ZIP is in public discussions (usually during the initial Draft
phase), a Discussions-To header will indicate the URL where the ZIP is
being discussed. No Discussions-To header is necessary if the ZIP is being
discussed privately with the Owner.
The Pull-Request header, if present, gives an URL to a Pull Request for
the ZIP.
The Category header specifies the type of ZIP, as described in
`ZIP categories`_. Multiple categories MAY be specified, separated by
" ``/`` ".
The Created header records the date that the ZIP was submitted.
Dates should be in yyyy-mm-dd format, e.g. 2001-08-14.
For ZIPs written in reStructuredText, URLs in header fields SHOULD be
surrounded by ``<`` ``>``; this ensures that the link is rendered correctly.
Auxiliary Files
---------------
ZIPs may include auxiliary files such as diagrams. Auxiliary files
should be included in a subdirectory for that ZIP; that is, for any ZIP
that requires more than one file, all of the files SHOULD be in a
subdirectory named zip-XXXX.
ZIP categories
==============
Each ZIP is in one or more of the following categories, as specified
in the Category header:
Consensus
Rules that affect the consensus protocol followed by all Zcash
implementations.
Standards
Non-consensus changes affecting most or all Zcash implementations, or
the interoperability of applications using Zcash.
Process
A Process ZIP describes a process surrounding Zcash, or proposes a
change to (or an event in) a process. They may propose an implementation,
but not to Zcash's codebase; they often require community consensus;
unlike Informational ZIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users
are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures,
guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the
tools or environment used in Zcash development.
Consensus Process
A subcategory of Process ZIP that specifies requirements and processes
that are to be realized by one or more Consensus ZIPs, and/or by social
consensus of the Zcash community.
Informational
An Informational ZIP describes non-consensus Zcash design issues, or
general guidelines or information for the Zcash community. These ZIPs
do not not necessarily represent a Zcash community consensus or
recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore
Informational ZIPs or follow their advice.
Network
Specifications of peer-to-peer networking behaviour.
RPC
Specifications of the RPC interface provided by zcashd nodes.
Wallet
Specifications affecting wallets (e.g. non-consensus changes to how
transactions, addresses, etc. are constructed or interpreted).
Ecosystem
Specifications otherwise useful to the Zcash ecosystem.
New categories may be added by consensus among the ZIP Editors.
Consensus and Standards ZIPs SHOULD have a Reference Implementation section,
which includes or (more often) links to an implementation.
Consensus ZIPs SHOULD have a Deployment section, describing how and when
the consensus change is planned to be deployed (for example, in a particular
network upgrade).
ZIP Status Field
================
* Reserved: The ZIP Editors have reserved this ZIP number, and there MAY
be a Pull Request for it, but no ZIP has been published. The ZIP Editors
SHOULD publish a stub header so that the reservation appears in the
`ZIP index <https://zips.z.cash#index-of-zips>`__.
* Draft: All initial ZIP submissions have this status.
* Withdrawn: If the Owner decides to remove the ZIP from
consideration by the community, they may set the status to Withdrawn.
* Active: Typically only used for Process/Informational ZIPs, achieved
once rough consensus is reached in PR/forum posts from Draft Process ZIP.
* Proposed: Typically the stage after Draft, added to a ZIP after
consideration, feedback, and rough consensus from the community. The ZIP
Editors must validate this change before it is approved.
* Rejected: The status when progress hasn't been made on the ZIP in one
year. Can revert back to Draft/Proposed if the Owner resumes work
or resolves issues preventing consensus.
* Implemented: When a Consensus or Standards ZIP has a working
reference implementation but before activation on the Zcash network.
* Final: When a Consensus or Standards ZIP is both implemented
and activated on the Zcash network.
* Obsolete: The status when a ZIP is no longer relevant (typically when
superseded by another ZIP).
More details on the status workflow are given in the section below.
Specification
-------------
Owners of a ZIP may decide on their own to change the status between
Draft or Withdrawn.
A ZIP may only change status from Draft (or Rejected) to Proposed, when
the Owner deems it is complete and there is rough consensus on the
forums, validated by both the Electric Coin Company and Zcash Foundation
Editors. One Editor will not suffice — there needs to be consensus
among the Editors. If it's a Consensus ZIP, a Deployment section MUST
be present in order for the ZIP to change status to Proposed. Typically,
although not necessarily, this will specify a network upgrade in which
the consensus change is to activate.
A Standards ZIP may only change status from Proposed to Implemented once
the Owners provide an associated reference implementation, typically in
the period after the network upgrade's specification freeze but before
the implementation audit. If the Owners miss this deadline, the Editors
or Owners MAY choose to update the Deployment section of the ZIP to
target another upgrade, at their discretion.
ZIPs should be changed from Draft or Proposed status, to Rejected
status, upon request by any person, if they have not made progress in
one year. Such a ZIP may be changed to Draft status if the Owner
provides revisions that meaningfully address public criticism of the
proposal, or to Proposed status if it meets the criteria required as
described in the previous paragraphs.
A Consensus or Standards ZIP becomes Final when its associated network
upgrade or other protocol change is activated on Zcash's mainnet.
A Process or Informational ZIP may change status from Draft to Active
when it achieves rough consensus on the forum or PR. Such a proposal is
said to have rough consensus if it has been open to discussion on the
forum or GitHub PR for at least one month, and no person maintains
any unaddressed substantiated objections to it. Addressed or obstructive
objections may be ignored/overruled by general agreement that they have
been sufficiently addressed, but clear reasoning must be given in such
circumstances.
When an Active or Final ZIP is no longer relevant, its status may be
changed to Obsolete. This change must also be objectively verifiable
and/or discussed. Final ZIPs may be updated; the specification is still
in force but modified by another specified ZIP or ZIPs (check the
optional Updated-by header).
ZIP Comments
============
Comments from the community on the ZIP should occur on the Zcash
Community Forum and the comment fields of the pull requests in
any open ZIPs. Editors will use these sources to judge rough consensus.
ZIP Licensing
=============
New ZIPs may be accepted with the following licenses. Each new ZIP MUST
identify at least one acceptable license in its preamble. Each license
MUST be referenced by their respective abbreviation given below.
For example, a preamble might include the following License header::
License: BSD-2-Clause
GNU-All-Permissive
In this case, the ZIP text is fully licensed under both the OSI-approved
BSD 2-clause license as well as the GNU All-Permissive License, and
anyone may modify and redistribute the text provided they comply with
the terms of *either* license. In other words, the license list is an
"OR choice", not an "AND also" requirement.
It is also possible to license source code differently from the ZIP
text. This case SHOULD be indicated in the Reference Implementation
section of the ZIP. Again, each license MUST be referenced by its
respective abbreviation given below.
Statements of code licenses in ZIPs are only advisory; anyone intending
to use the code should look for license statements in the code itself.
ZIPs are not required to be *exclusively* licensed under approved
terms, and MAY also be licensed under unacceptable licenses
*in addition to* at least one acceptable license. In this case, only the
acceptable license(s) should be listed in the License header.
Recommended licenses
--------------------
* MIT: `Expat/MIT/X11 license <https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT>`__
* BSD-2-Clause: `OSI-approved BSD 2-clause
license <https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause>`__
* BSD-3-Clause: `OSI-approved BSD 3-clause
license <https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause>`__
* CC0-1.0: `Creative Commons CC0 1.0
Universal <https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/>`__
* GNU-All-Permissive: `GNU All-Permissive
License <https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/License-Notices-for-Other-Files.html>`__
* Apache-2.0: `Apache License, version
2.0 <https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>`__
In addition, it is RECOMMENDED that literal code included in the ZIP be
dual-licensed under the same license terms as the project it modifies.
For example, literal code intended for zcashd would ideally be
dual-licensed under the MIT license terms as well as one of the above
with the rest of the ZIP text.
Not recommended, but acceptable licenses
----------------------------------------
* BSL-1.0: `Boost Software License, version
1.0 <https://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt>`__
* CC-BY-4.0: `Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>`__
* CC-BY-SA-4.0: `Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/>`__
* AGPL-3.0+: `GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL), version 3 or
newer <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html>`__
* FDL-1.3: `GNU Free Documentation License, version
1.3 <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.en.html>`__
* GPL-2.0+: `GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2 or
newer <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html>`__
* LGPL-2.1+: `GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL), version 2.1 or
newer <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.en.html>`__
Not acceptable licenses
-----------------------
All licenses not explicitly included in the above lists are not
acceptable terms for a Zcash Improvement Proposal.
Rationale
---------
Bitcoin's BIP 1 allowed the Open Publication License or releasing into
the public domain; was this insufficient?
* The OPL is generally regarded as obsolete, and not a license suitable
for new publications.
* The OPL license terms allowed for the author to prevent publication
and derived works, which was widely considered inappropriate.
* In some jurisdictions, releasing a work to the public domain is not
recognised as a legitimate legal action, leaving the ZIP simply
copyrighted with no redistribution or modification allowed at all.
Why are there software licenses included?
* Some ZIPs, especially in the Consensus category, may include literal
code in the ZIP itself which may not be available under the exact
license terms of the ZIP.
* Despite this, not all software licenses would be acceptable for
content included in ZIPs.
See Also
========
* `RFC 7282: On Consensus and Humming in the
IETF <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7282.html>`__
* `Zcash Network Upgrade Pipeline <https://electriccoin.co/blog/the-zcash-network-upgrade-pipeline/>`__
References
==========
.. [#RFC2119] `RFC 2119: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119.html>`_
.. [#RFC3552] `RFC 3552: Guidelines for Writing RFC Text on Security Considerations <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3552.html>`_
.. [#zip-0200] `ZIP 200: Network Upgrade Mechanism <zip-0200.rst>`_
.. [#conduct] `Zcash Code of Conduct <https://github.com/zcash/zcash/blob/master/code_of_conduct.md>`_
.. [#rst] `reStructuredText documentation <https://docutils.sourceforge.io/rst.html>`_
.. [#markdown] `The Markdown Guide <https://www.markdownguide.org/>`_
.. [#latex] `LaTeX — a document preparation system <https://www.latex-project.org/>`_
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink