mirror of
https://github.com/morluto/rea.git
synced 2026-10-19 04:19:54 -05:00
112 lines
4.3 KiB
YAML
112 lines
4.3 KiB
YAML
name: Design discussion
|
|
description: Discuss an REA architecture, provider, contract, or scope decision
|
|
title: "[Design] "
|
|
labels:
|
|
- enhancement
|
|
- triage
|
|
body:
|
|
- type: markdown
|
|
attributes:
|
|
value: |
|
|
Use this for a substantial provider, public/persisted contract, or
|
|
authority-boundary decision. One question and a short explanation are
|
|
enough to start. Choose "Not sure yet" where needed; maintainers can help
|
|
with technical details, alternatives, and verification.
|
|
|
|
Read the [contribution scope](https://github.com/morluto/rea/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-scope).
|
|
Unresolved boundaries block integration, not opening a discussion.
|
|
|
|
- type: checkboxes
|
|
id: before-submitting
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Before submitting
|
|
options:
|
|
- label: I searched the open and closed issues and pull requests for a related discussion.
|
|
required: true
|
|
- label: I understand the [contribution scope](https://github.com/morluto/rea/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-scope) must be reviewed before integration; open questions are welcome here.
|
|
required: true
|
|
- label: This discussion does not include credentials, private samples, or sensitive target data.
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: decision
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Decision needed
|
|
description: What would you like maintainers to help decide? A short question is enough.
|
|
placeholder: Should REA ... or ...?
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: context-evidence
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Context and evidence
|
|
description: Explain the problem or motivation and link relevant evidence when available. Distinguish observed behavior, source-derived reasoning, proposed behavior, and unknowns. A question without measurements or a finished design is welcome.
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: dropdown
|
|
id: target-interaction
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Expected interaction with targets
|
|
description: >-
|
|
Select all known effects, including upstream tool behavior. Add "Not sure
|
|
yet" if anything is unclear. Use "No target interaction" only on its own.
|
|
These selections help discussion and do not establish scope approval.
|
|
multiple: true
|
|
options:
|
|
- Read existing files or captured data
|
|
- Launch or attach to a process
|
|
- Inject instrumentation or run scripts/code
|
|
- Change process memory or registers
|
|
- Write or change files/configuration
|
|
- Contact network services
|
|
- Recover protected code or work around protections
|
|
- No target interaction (documentation or usability only)
|
|
- Not sure yet
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: boundary-invariants
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Boundary details (optional)
|
|
description: >-
|
|
If known, clarify target selection, selected effects, provider boundaries,
|
|
non-goals, or evidence invariants. Leave blank if you need help identifying
|
|
them. Do not include private samples or proof-of-authorization documents.
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: options
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Options and tradeoffs
|
|
description: Optional approaches or tradeoffs. One idea is enough; maintainers can help compare alternatives.
|
|
|
|
- type: dropdown
|
|
id: verification-readiness
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Verification available so far
|
|
description: Pick the closest match. An idea without samples or test results is welcome.
|
|
options:
|
|
- Idea only; I need help defining checks
|
|
- I can suggest a sample or manual check
|
|
- I have a prototype or observed results
|
|
- Not sure yet
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: success-criteria
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Success criteria and open questions
|
|
description: >-
|
|
Optional expected output, sample, possible check, or unresolved question.
|
|
A complete test plan is not required to start; maintainers and implementers
|
|
will resolve material verification gaps before integration.
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: references
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: References
|
|
description: Link relevant contracts, upstream provider documentation, tests, measurements, or prior discussions.
|