theupdateframework / theupdateframework/specification
Secondary literature with detailed rationale and recommendations
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 405
- Forks
- 59
- Avg merge
- 3d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
It could be valuable for potential adopters of TUF if there were some documentation beyond the specification, published papers and conversations captured on GitHub, that goes into detail about certain decisions, makes recommendations where the specification deliberately leaves things open and points to open implementations of the specification (i.e. Notary and PEP 458) as examples of the context for the various decisions that must be made when applying the TUF specification to a scenario.
The spec is a good document but provides several points where choices must be made without providing any explanation or guidance.
The papers which motivated various spec decisions and changes provide interesting reading but can be a little dense when trying to understand a nuance of the specification where the context for a decision may be difficult to elicit and, furthermore, the papers are a static document, unlike the specification itself.
In contrast to the specification, which should only say “do XYZ”, this additional document could say things like “do XYZ because foo, bar, baz” or “do X if your situation is quux (akin to projects ABC) or do Y if it is thud (akin to projects DEF)”.
cc @lukpueh
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Review the TUF specification, the papers motivating its decisions, and the GitHub conversations referenced in the issue. Compare the open implementations Notary and PEP 458 as examples of applying the specification. Done would be supplementary documentation explaining rationale, recommendations for open choices, and relevant implementation examples.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100