SHALL -> MUST

The [spec](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119) states that these keywords are aliased to each other (in order to alleviate issues arising from the misinterpretation of using "shall"). Consistency helps readers (especially new/unfamiliar ones). 👀 References:

- https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/plain_language/articles/mandatory/ 
- https://ell.stackexchange.com/a/171990/2487
pull/200/head
Jesse Jackson 5 years ago committed by GitHub
parent 31bdf7bd11
commit 7ec4d2c31a
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23

@ -88,26 +88,26 @@ C4 is meant to provide a reusable optimal collaboration model for open source so
### Preliminaries
- The project SHALL use the git distributed revision control system.
- The project SHALL be hosted on github.com or equivalent, herein called the "Platform".
- The project SHALL use the Platform issue tracker.
- The project MUST use the git distributed revision control system.
- The project MUST be hosted on github.com or equivalent, herein called the "Platform".
- The project MUST use the Platform issue tracker.
- Non-GitHub example:
- "Platform" could be a vanilla git repo and Trac hosted on the same machine/network.
- The Platform issue tracker would be Trac.
- The project SHOULD have clearly documented guidelines for code style.
- A "Contributor" is a person who wishes to provide a patch, being a set of commits that solve some clearly identified problem.
- A "Maintainer" is a person who merges patches to the project. Maintainers are not developers; their job is to enforce process.
- Contributors SHALL NOT have commit access to the repository unless they are also Maintainers.
- Maintainers SHALL have commit access to the repository.
- Everyone, without distinction or discrimination, SHALL have an equal right to become a Contributor under the terms of this contract.
- Contributors MUST NOT have commit access to the repository unless they are also Maintainers.
- Maintainers MUST have commit access to the repository.
- Everyone, without distinction or discrimination, MUST have an equal right to become a Contributor under the terms of this contract.
### Licensing and ownership
- The project SHALL use a share-alike license, such as BSD-3, the GPLv3 or a variant thereof (LGPL, AGPL), or the MPLv2.
- All contributions to the project source code ("patches") SHALL use the same license as the project.
- All patches are owned by their authors. There SHALL NOT be any copyright assignment process.
- The copyrights in the project SHALL be owned collectively by all its Contributors.
- Each Contributor SHALL be responsible for identifying themselves in the project Contributor list.
- The project MUST use a share-alike license, such as BSD-3, the GPLv3 or a variant thereof (LGPL, AGPL), or the MPLv2.
- All contributions to the project source code ("patches") MUST use the same license as the project.
- All patches are owned by their authors. There MUST NOT be any copyright assignment process.
- The copyrights in the project MUST be owned collectively by all its Contributors.
- Each Contributor MUST be responsible for identifying themselves in the project Contributor list.
### Patch requirements
@ -116,27 +116,27 @@ C4 is meant to provide a reusable optimal collaboration model for open source so
- A patch SHOULD be a minimal and accurate answer to exactly one identified and agreed problem.
- A patch MUST adhere to the code style guidelines of the project if these are defined.
- A patch MUST adhere to the "Evolution of Public Contracts" guidelines defined below.
- A patch SHALL NOT include non-trivial code from other projects unless the Contributor is the original author of that code.
- A patch MUST NOT include non-trivial code from other projects unless the Contributor is the original author of that code.
- A patch MUST compile cleanly and pass project self-tests on at least the principle target platform.
- A patch commit message SHOULD consist of a single short (less than 50 character) line summarizing the change, optionally followed by a blank line and then a more thorough description.
- A "Correct Patch" is one that satisfies the above requirements.
### Development process
- Change on the project SHALL be governed by the pattern of accurately identifying problems and applying minimal, accurate solutions to these problems.
- Change on the project MUST be governed by the pattern of accurately identifying problems and applying minimal, accurate solutions to these problems.
- To request changes, a user SHOULD log an issue on the project Platform issue tracker.
- The user or Contributor SHOULD write the issue by describing the problem they face or observe.
- The user or Contributor SHOULD seek consensus on the accuracy of their observation, and the value of solving the problem.
- Users SHALL NOT log feature requests, ideas, or suggestions unrelated to Monero code or Monero's dependency code or Monero's potential/future dependency code or research which successfully implements Monero.
- Users SHALL NOT log any solutions to problems (verifiable or hypothetical) of which are not explicitly documented and/or not provable and/or cannot be reasonably proven.
- Thus, the release history of the project SHALL be a list of meaningful issues logged and solved.
- To work on an issue, a Contributor SHALL fork the project repository and then work on their forked repository.
- To submit a patch, a Contributor SHALL create a Platform pull request back to the project.
- A Contributor SHALL NOT commit changes directly to the project.
- Users MUST NOT log feature requests, ideas, or suggestions unrelated to Monero code or Monero's dependency code or Monero's potential/future dependency code or research which successfully implements Monero.
- Users MUST NOT log any solutions to problems (verifiable or hypothetical) of which are not explicitly documented and/or not provable and/or cannot be reasonably proven.
- Thus, the release history of the project MUST be a list of meaningful issues logged and solved.
- To work on an issue, a Contributor MUST fork the project repository and then work on their forked repository.
- To submit a patch, a Contributor MUST create a Platform pull request back to the project.
- A Contributor MUST NOT commit changes directly to the project.
- To discuss a patch, people MAY comment on the Platform pull request, on the commit, or elsewhere.
- To accept or reject a patch, a Maintainer SHALL use the Platform interface.
- To accept or reject a patch, a Maintainer MUST use the Platform interface.
- Maintainers SHOULD NOT merge their own patches except in exceptional cases, such as non-responsiveness from other Maintainers for an extended period (more than 30 days) or unless urgent as defined by the Monero Maintainers Team.
- Maintainers SHALL NOT make value judgments on correct patches unless the Maintainer (as may happen in rare circumstances) is a core code developer.
- Maintainers MUST NOT make value judgments on correct patches unless the Maintainer (as may happen in rare circumstances) is a core code developer.
- Maintainers MUST NOT merge pull requests in less than 168 hours (1 week) unless deemed urgent by at least 2 people from the Monero Maintainer Team.
- The Contributor MAY tag an issue as "Ready" after making a pull request for the issue.
- The user who created an issue SHOULD close the issue after checking the patch is successful.
@ -146,27 +146,27 @@ C4 is meant to provide a reusable optimal collaboration model for open source so
### Creating stable releases
- The project SHALL have one branch ("master") that always holds the latest in-progress version and SHOULD always build.
- The project SHALL NOT use topic branches for any reason. Personal forks MAY use topic branches.
- To make a stable release someone SHALL fork the repository by copying it and thus become maintainer of this repository.
- The project MUST have one branch ("master") that always holds the latest in-progress version and SHOULD always build.
- The project MUST NOT use topic branches for any reason. Personal forks MAY use topic branches.
- To make a stable release someone MUST fork the repository by copying it and thus become maintainer of this repository.
- Forking a project for stabilization MAY be done unilaterally and without agreement of project maintainers.
- A patch to a stabilization project declared "stable" SHALL be accompanied by a reproducible test case.
- A patch to a stabilization project declared "stable" MUST be accompanied by a reproducible test case.
### Evolution of public contracts
- All Public Contracts (APIs or protocols) SHALL be documented.
- All Public Contracts (APIs or protocols) MUST be documented.
- All Public Contracts SHOULD have space for extensibility and experimentation.
- A patch that modifies a stable Public Contract SHOULD not break existing applications unless there is overriding consensus on the value of doing this.
- A patch that introduces new features to a Public Contract SHOULD do so using new names.
- Old names SHOULD be deprecated in a systematic fashion by marking new names as "experimental" until they are stable, then marking the old names as "deprecated".
- When sufficient time has passed, old deprecated names SHOULD be marked "legacy" and eventually removed.
- Old names SHALL NOT be reused by new features.
- Old names MUST NOT be reused by new features.
- When old names are removed, their implementations MUST provoke an exception (assertion) if used by applications.
### Project administration
- The project founders SHALL act as Administrators to manage the set of project Maintainers.
- The Administrators SHALL ensure their own succession over time by promoting the most effective Maintainers.
- A new Contributor who makes a correct patch SHALL be invited to become a Maintainer.
- The project founders MUST act as Administrators to manage the set of project Maintainers.
- The Administrators MUST ensure their own succession over time by promoting the most effective Maintainers.
- A new Contributor who makes a correct patch MUST be invited to become a Maintainer.
- Administrators MAY remove Maintainers who are inactive for an extended period of time, or who repeatedly fail to apply this process accurately.
- Administrators SHOULD block or ban "bad actors" who cause stress and pain to others in the project. This should be done after public discussion, with a chance for all parties to speak. A bad actor is someone who repeatedly ignores the rules and culture of the project, who is needlessly argumentative or hostile, or who is offensive, and who is unable to self-correct their behavior when asked to do so by others.

Loading…
Cancel
Save