Add PLEP 1 on purpose and guidelines of PLEPs

PLEP-0001.md

@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+# PLEP-0001 -- Purpose and guidelines for PlasmaPy Enhancement Proposals
+
+| PLEP              | 1                                                         |
+|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
+| title             | Purpose and guidelines for PlasmaPy Enhancement Proposals |
+| author(s)         | Nick Murphy                                               |
+| contact email     | [email protected]                                  |
+| date created      | 2017-11-13                                                |
+| date last revised | 2018-02-04                                                |
+| type              | process                                                   |
+| status            | in preparation                                            |
+
+## Introduction
+
+**Pl**asmaPy **E**nhancement **P**roposals (PLEPs) are design documents
+that provide information to the PlasmaPy community, describe
+decision-making processes, or propose major changes or enhancements to
+the code.  PLEPs are intended to be the primary mechanism for proposing 
+major changes to the direction of PlasmaPy, collecting community
+feedback, and documenting the reasoning behind major decisions.
+
+## Types of PLEPs
+
+There are three primary types of PLEPs:
+
+* A **standard PLEP** introduces and describes a major change to the
+  PlasmaPy code base.  Standard PLEPs may describe a new feature or
+  subpackage, major changes to an existing package, or a backwards
+  incompatible change to the application programming interface (API).
+  A standard PLEP will start out as a proposal and eventually evolve
+  into a design document if accepted.
+
+* A **process PLEP** describes a new process or change to an existing
+  process in the management and coordination of PlasmaPy.  Examples
+  include changes to PlasmaPy decision-making processes or management
+  structure, guidelines, or procedures.  A process PLEP will start out
+  as a proposal and eventually evolve into a document on the
+  governance of PlasmaPy.
+
+* An **informational PLEP** provides information and does not describe
+  any changes.
+
+## PLEP workflow
+
+A PLEP may come about when a contributor has an idea for how to improve
+PlasmaPy or when a Coordinating Committee member or subpackage 
+maintainer requests a PLEP to be written before a pull request is
+accepted. The following subsections describe the procedure for PLEPs to
+be created, submitted, decided upon, amended, and implemented. Anyone 
+who abides by the code of conduct may submit a PLEP.
+
+### Creating a PLEP
+
+Before writing a PLEP, it is generally advisable to bring up your idea
+on the PlasmaPy 
+[Matrix](https://riot.im/app/#/room/#plasmapy:matrix.org)/[Gitter](
+https://gitter.im/PlasmaPy/Lobby) channel and with the Coordinating
+Committee and/or subpackage maintainers to get initial feedback. PLEPs
+are not necessary for minor changes, which are often best [submitted as
+issues](https://github.com/PlasmaPy/PlasmaPy/issues/new) on the
+[PlasmaPy GitHub repository](https://github.com/PlasmaPy/PlasmaPy).
+
+A PLEP should contain a clear, concise, and well-organized description
+of a new idea or proposal.  PLEPs should generally focus on a single
+topic.  PLEPs should be written to be understandable to general
+members of the PlasmaPy community rather than just core contributors
+and Coordinating Committee members.  However, technical details should
+be included when needed (e.g., when describing details about how a
+proposed change should be implemented).
+
+Standard PLEPs are generally only needed for major improvements to the
+code base such as significant restructuring of the code base or
+adoption of a new standard.  PLEPs are more likely to be needed for
+changes that break backwards compatibility, especially for stable
+subpackages in development releases and after the release of version
+`1.0.0`.  PLEPs are not needed for minor changes.  
+
+All new PLEPs should begin with a copy of the PLEP template contained
+within the PlasmaPy/PlasmaPy-PLEPs repository.  This copy should be
+renamed to `PLEP-nnnn.md` where `nnnn` should be the lowest PLEP number
+preceded by zeros that has not been tentatively or permanently assigned
+by the Coordinating Committee.  The template contains a suggested
+outline that is most appropriate for a standard PLEP.  Not all sections
+included in the template are required for every PLEP, and sometimes it
+is appropriate to create different sections.
+
+### Amending or superceding a PLEP
+
+PLEPs may be amended or superceded as PlasmaPy grows and changes.
+
+If a topic is already covered by an existing PLEP, then it is often
+appropriate to propose an amendment to that PLEP instead of writing a
+new PLEP.  Amendments should not substantially change the spirit of
+the PLEP.  Proposed amendments should update the "date last revised"
+category in the header.  Amendments to PLEPs go through the same
+process as newly proposed PLEPs.
+
+When major changes to a PLEP are desired, then it is most appropriate
+to propose a new PLEP to supercede the old PLEP.  The pull request to
+supersede a PLEP should change the "status" category in the header of
+the old PLEP to "superseded by PLEP N" where N is the number of the new
+PLEP not preceded by zeros.
+
+When PLEPs are amended or superseded, it is generally helpful to request
+reviews from the authors of the original PLEP.
+
+Minor changes to a PLEP that do not affect its meaning or intent (e.g., 
+formatting changes, fixes to typos, updates to links, minor rewording to
+improve clarity, and reversing cosmic ray bit flips) do not need to go 
+through the full review process, but do require approval by the
+Coordinating Committee.
+
+### Submitting a PLEP
+
+All new PLEPs and amendments to PLEPs should be submitted as pull
+requests into the PlasmaPy-PLEP repository.  The pull request should be
+created while the PLEP is being written to allow for greater 
+transparency and community input during the writing process.  In this
+case, the sponsor should comment on the pull request and inform the
+Coordinating Committee when the proposed PLEP is ready for review.
+
+### Review process
+
+When a new PLEP or an amendment to a PLEP is submitted, the Coordinating 
+Committee should appoint one of its members to be the PLEP's editor. The
+editor is responsible for aiding the sponsor by making sure that the 
+PLEP follows the accepted standard and facilitating communication
+between the sponsor and the Coordinating Committee. The editor and
+sponsor may be the same person.
+
+When the sponsor and editor decide that the proposal is ready for
+broader discussion, then they should email the PlasmaPy list to 
+introduce the PLEP and request community feedback.  The status of the
+PLEP should be changed to "Discussion" at this time.  Community 
+discussion should take place through normal communication channels such
+as the Matrix/Gitter channel, on the pull request on GitHub, and video
+conferences. Concerns that are raised should be constructive and made in 
+accordance with the PlasmaPy code of conduct. Important points and
+relevant meeting minutes should be recorded as comments on the GitHub 
+pull request so that the community discussion may be archived.  During 
+the discussion phase, the sponsor should revise the PLEP in order to
+address concerns raised by the community. Others may propose changes as 
+well. The discussion should continue until a general consensus among the 
+PlasmaPy community has been reached.
+
+The Coordinating Committee is tasked with making the final decision on
+the PLEP.  A PLEP shall be accepted when approved by at least two-thirds 
+of the Coordinating Committee.
+
+### PLEP status
+
+The status of a standard or process PLEP may be any of the following:
+
+* **In preparation**: The PLEP is currently being written.  Community
+  input is welcome during this phase so that concerns may be addressed
+  earlier rather than later.
+
+* **Discussion**: The PLEP is currently being considered and getting
+  community feedback before a decision has been made.  This is the
+  default status for informational PLEPs that have been completed.
+
+* **Accepted**: The PLEP has been accepted and it will be assigned a
+  number and merged into the PlasmaPy/PlasmaPy-PLEPs repository.  A
+  decision rationale must be drafted and added to the PLEP by the
+  sponsor of the PLEP or by someone appointed by the Coordinating
+  Committee.  Features proposed in standard PLEPs may now be
+  implemented.  Process PLEPs come into effect when accepted.
+
+* **Implemented**: The feature discussed in a standard PLEP has been
+  fully implemented and merged into the main repository.  At least
+  half of the Coordinating Committee must agree that the
+  implementation (including documentation and tests) is complete.  A
+  summary of the implementation process should be added to the PLEP
+  when this status is reached.  This summary should include links to
+  the issues and pull requests associated with this PLEP that were
+  created after the PLEP was accepted.
+
+* **Declined**: The community and Coordinating Committee decided against 
+  a proposed PLEP.  A decision rationale should be provided by the 
+  sponsor and/or Coordinating Committee.  The PLEP should still be
+  assigned a number and merged into the main repository.  A future PLEP 
+  may supercede this decision.
+
+* **Superseded**: THe PLEP is no longer in effect and has been replaced
+  by another PLEP.
+
+Informational PLEPs that are being written should have a status of
+**in preparation**, and **informational** when it is sufficiently 
+complete. Informational PLEPs may also have a statuses of **outdated**
+when the some of the information is out-of-date and needs updating, or 
+**obsolete** when the PLEP is no longer needed.