Skip to content

Commit ac3de0b

Browse files
committed
Auto merge of #14599 - epage:charter, r=weihanglo
docs(charter): Declare new Intentional Artifacts as 'small' changes ### What does this PR try to resolve? The default stance for new "Intentional Artifact" crates is that an RFC is needed, see [Crate ownership policy](https://forge.rust-lang.org/policies/crate-ownership.html). However, it gives room for team's to have their charter define the process. As we don't generally need wide input for these decisions, I'm proposing we treat these as "small" changes and only require an FCP. ### How should we test and review this PR? ### Additional information
2 parents fd5f1a0 + c08b437 commit ac3de0b

File tree

1 file changed

+1
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+1
-0
lines changed

src/doc/contrib/src/team.md

+1
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -135,6 +135,7 @@ The degree of process is correlated with the degree of change being proposed:
135135
These decisions are usually processed via private channels by the entirety of the team.
136136
- A change that is a "one-way door".
137137
That is, something that is difficult to reverse without breaking backwards compatibility.
138+
- New or transferred "Intentional Artifact" crates to the team, see also [Rust crate ownership policy](https://forge.rust-lang.org/policies/crate-ownership.html)
138139

139140
- Larger features should usually go through the [RFC process].
140141
This usually involves first soliciting feedback from the Cargo team and the rest of the community, often via the [Rust Internals] discussion board, [Cargo's issue tracker], and the [Zulip] channel.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)