[RFC 55]: Declarative Wrappers

rfcs/0055-declarative-wrappers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+---
+feature: Declarative Wrappers
+start-date: (fill me in with today's date, YYYY-MM-DD)
+author: Doron Behar
+co-authors: (find a buddy later to help out with the RFC)
+shepherd-team: (names, to be nominated and accepted by RFC steering committee)
+shepherd-leader: (name to be appointed by RFC steering committee)
+related-issues: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/85103
+---
+
+# Declarative Wrappers
+[summary]: #summary
+
+Nixpkgs has many 
+
+# Motivation
+[motivation]: #motivation
+
+Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected
+outcome?
+
+# Detailed design
+[design]: #detailed-design
+
+This is the core, normative part of the RFC. Explain the design in enough
+detail for somebody familiar with the ecosystem to understand, and implement.
+This should get into specifics and corner-cases. Yet, this section should also
+be terse, avoiding redundancy even at the cost of clarity.
+
+# Examples and Interactions
+[examples-and-interactions]: #examples-and-interactions
+
+This section illustrates the detailed design. This section should clarify all
+confusion the reader has from the previous sections. It is especially important
+to counterbalance the desired terseness of the detailed design; if you feel
+your detailed design is rudely short, consider making this section longer
+instead.
+
+# Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+Why should we *not* do this?
+
+# Alternatives
+[alternatives]: #alternatives
+
+What other designs have been considered? What is the impact of not doing this?
+
+# Unresolved questions
+[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
+
+What parts of the design are still TBD or unknowns?
+
+# Future work
+[future]: #future-work
+
+What future work, if any, would be implied or impacted by this feature
+without being directly part of the work?