ZIP: 0 Title: ZIP Process Owners: Daira Hopwood <email@example.com> Deirdre Connolly <firstname.lastname@example.org> Original-Authors: Daira Hopwood Josh Cincinnati George Tankersley Credits: Luke Dashjr Status: Active Category: Process Created: 2019-02-16 License: BSD-2-Clause
The key words "MUST", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", "RECOMMENDED", "OPTIONAL", and "REQUIRED" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. 1
The term "network upgrade" in this document is to be interpreted as described in ZIP 200. 3
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.
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.
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. 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 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.
The ZIP Editors currently use the following conventions when numbering ZIPs:
These conventions are subject to change by consensus of the ZIP Editors.
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.
The current ZIP Editors are Daira Hopwood, representing the Electric Coin Company, and Deirdre Connolly, representing the Zcash Foundation. Both can be reached at email@example.com . 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.
The ZIP Editors subscribe to the Zcash Community Forum.
For each new ZIP that comes in an Editor confirms the following:
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 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:
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:
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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>, or by opening an issue on the ZIPs issue tracker. All communications should abide by the Zcash Code of Conduct 4 and follow the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines
ZIPs SHOULD be written in reStructuredText 5, Markdown 6, or LaTeX 7. 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:
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 <email@example.com>
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.
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.
Each ZIP is in one or more of the following categories, as specified in the Category header:
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).
More details on the status workflow are given in the section below.
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).
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.
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.
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.
All licenses not explicitly included in the above lists are not acceptable terms for a Zcash Improvement Proposal.
Bitcoin's BIP 1 allowed the Open Publication License or releasing into the public domain; was this insufficient?
Why are there software licenses included?
|1||RFC 2119: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels|
|2||RFC 3552: Guidelines for Writing RFC Text on Security Considerations|
|3||ZIP 200: Network Upgrade Mechanism|
|4||Zcash Code of Conduct|
|6||The Markdown Guide|
|7||LaTeX — a document preparation system|