Master the vocabulary used in writing and reviewing technical RFCs.
0 / 5 completed
1 / 5
At standup, a dev shares a document proposing a new system design before writing code. What is this document called?
An RFC (request for comments) proposes a design or approach and invites structured feedback from the team before significant implementation work begins. It surfaces disagreement and edge cases early, when changes are cheap. This is standard practice for consequential technical decisions.
2 / 5
During a design review, the RFC lists other approaches that were considered and rejected. What section is this?
The alternatives considered section documents other viable approaches and why they were not chosen, showing the author explored the solution space. This preempts reviewers re-litigating options already evaluated. It also serves as institutional memory for future readers.
3 / 5
In a code review of the RFC template, a section explains why the current situation is a problem worth solving. What is this called?
The motivation (or problem statement) section establishes why the status quo is inadequate and what pain point justifies the proposed change. Without it, reviewers can't judge whether the effort is worthwhile. A strong motivation section anchors the rest of the RFC's reasoning.
4 / 5
An incident report references an RFC's plan for gradually enabling a feature and reverting if needed. What section describes this?
The rollout and rollback plan describes how the change will be deployed incrementally (e.g., feature flags, staged regions) and how to safely revert if problems appear. This section reduces risk for consequential changes. Omitting it is a common gap that causes messy incident response later.
5 / 5
During a PR review, a teammate asks who must formally sign off before the RFC's plan proceeds. What is this process called?
Most RFC processes define required approval or sign-off from specific stakeholders (e.g., tech lead, security, affected team owners) before implementation proceeds. This ensures accountable decision-making on significant changes. Skipping formal sign-off is a common cause of later disputes about whether a design was actually agreed.