A formal process for proposing and discussing substantial changes to the React library.
React RFCs is the official Request for Comments repository for the React JavaScript library. It is a formal process where developers can propose, discuss, and review substantial changes to React's API, features, or documentation before they are implemented. It serves as a governance mechanism to ensure React evolves in a deliberate, consensus-driven manner.
React core team members, library contributors, and advanced community developers who want to propose or understand upcoming changes to React's architecture and public API.
It provides a transparent, structured forum for shaping React's future, allowing the community to participate in design decisions and ensuring changes are well-vetted and aligned with the library's long-term vision.
RFCs for changes to React
Open-Awesome is built by the community, for the community. Submit a project, suggest an awesome list, or help improve the catalog on GitHub.
Provides a standardized template and clear steps for submitting RFCs, ensuring thorough design consideration and reducing ad-hoc changes, as outlined in the 'What the process is' section.
Facilitates open discussion and feedback from both the React core team and the broader community, making React's evolution visible and participatory, as emphasized in the 'Community and Team Collaboration' philosophy.
Supports both React Team RFCs (from maintainers) and Community RFCs (from external contributors), allowing for varied levels of input and design phases, detailed in the 'What to expect' section.
Aims to build agreement around new features, ensuring they align with React's architecture and long-term stability, which is core to the RFC process's purpose.
The README explicitly states that the React Team cannot commit to timely reviews for community RFCs, leading to potential delays of months or longer for feedback.
Most community RFCs are rejected due to design gaps or misalignment with React's scope, making it a high-effort, low-reward endeavor for external contributors.
Even accepted RFCs may not be prioritized for implementation, as the team focuses on their own roadmap, leaving features in limbo without clear timelines.