Decentralized Climate Foundation (DCIPs) describe standards for the Decentralized Climate platform, including core protocol specifications, client APIs, and contract standards. Network upgrades are discussed separately in the Decentralized Climate Project Management repository.
DCIP status terms
- Idea - An idea that is pre-draft. This is not tracked within the DCIP Repository.
- Draft - The first formally tracked stage of an DCIP in development. An DCIP is merged by an DCIP Editor into the DCIP repository when properly formatted.
- Review - An DCIP Author marks an DCIP as ready for and requesting Peer Review.
- Last Call - This is the final review window for an DCIP before moving to FINAL. An DCIP editor will assign Last Call status and set a review end date (`last-call-deadline`), typically 14 days later. If this period results in necessary normative changes it will revert the DCIP to Review.
- Final - This DCIP represents the final standard. A Final DCIP exists in a state of finality and should only be updated to correct errata and add non-normative clarifications.
- Stagnant - Any DCIP in Draft or Review if inactive for a period of 6 months or greater is moved to Stagnant. An DCIP may be resurrected from this state by Authors or DCIP Editors through moving it back to Draft.
- Withdrawn - The DCIP Author(s) have withdrawn the proposed DCIP. This state has finality and can no longer be resurrected using this DCIP number. If the idea is pursued at later date it is considered a new proposal.
- Living - A special status for DCIPs that are designed to be continually updated and not reach a state of finality. This includes most notably DCIP-1 and DCIP-2.
DCIPs are separated into a number of types, and each has its own list of DCIPs.
Standard Track (3)
Describes any change that affects most or all Decentralized Foundation implementations, such as a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, proposed application standards/conventions, or any change or addition that affects the interoperability of applications using Decentralized Foundation. Furthermore Standard DCIPs can be broken down into the following categories.
Improvements requiring a consensus fork, as well as changes that are not necessarily consensus critical but may be relevant to “core dev” discussions
Includes improvements around devp2p and Light Decentralized Foundation Subprotocol, as well as proposed improvements to network protocol specifications of whisper and swarm.
Includes improvements around client API/RPC specifications and standards, and also certain language-level standards like method names and contract ABIs. The label “interface” aligns with the interfaces repo and discussion should primarily occur in that repository before an DCIP is submitted to the DCIPs repository.
Describes a process surrounding Decentralized Foundation or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process DCIPs are like Standards Track DCIPs but apply to areas other than the Decentralized Foundation protocol itself. They may propose an implementation, but not to Decentralized Foundation's codebase; they often require community consensus; unlike Informational DCIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Decentralized Foundation development. Any meta-DCIP is also considered a Process DCIP.
Describes a Decentralized Foundation design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the Decentralized Foundation community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational DCIPs do not necessarily represent Decentralized Foundation community consensus or a recommendation, so users and implementers are free to ignore Informational DCIPs or follow their advice.