How to choose: Issue vs Discussion vs RFC

[dcarranza-axl]

TL;DR decision tree

Does the change have clear acceptance criteria + a defined scope?
  YES -> file an Issue on the affected repo
  NO  -> start a Discussion here in the right category

Is the change to spec, packet format, governance, or trademark?
  YES + breaking      -> RFC (14-day comment window)
  YES + additive only -> Idea (no comment window, discuss + small PR)
  YES + governance    -> RFC (30-day comment window)
  NO                  -> Idea, Q&A, or General depending on shape

Detailed criteria

File an Issue (NOT here, on the affected repo)

File an Issue when:

• You have a specific bug with reproduction steps
• You have a specific task with clear acceptance criteria
• The work is well-scoped (one component, one outcome, one PR)
• A maintainer or contributor can pick it up and ship it

Where: github.com/axlprotocol/{repo}/issues for the repo where the change lands.

Start a Discussion HERE

Start a Discussion when:

• You have a question and want help (Q&A)
• You have an idea but the shape is not yet clear (Ideas)
• You want to share something you built (Show and tell)
• You want broad input on direction (General, Polls)
• You want to announce something (Announcements - maintainers only)

File an RFC (here, in the RFC category once it exists)

File an RFC when:

• The change touches kernel grammar (v3.1 / v4 router spec)
• The change touches packet format (PKT, OP, SUBJ, ARG1, ARG2, TEMP, META)
• The change adds or removes a semantic operation (OBS, INF, CON, MRG, SEK, YLD, PRD)
• The change adds or removes a subject tag
• The change is breaking (existing parsers stop working)
• The change is to governance, foundation, license, or trademark

Comment windows (from GOVERNANCE.md):

• Breaking changes: 14 days
• Governance / foundation / trademark: 30 days

Approval (during the first 12 months): founding-steward sign-off after the comment window.

Borderline cases

• "Should the v4 router have a sixth module?" -> RFC. Adding a Rosetta module to the router contract is a spec change.
• "Should compress.axlprotocol.org show tokens or characters by default?" -> Idea. UI default with no spec impact.
• "Why is my packet failing to parse?" -> Q&A. Support question.
• "I built an axl-core integration with Cursor" -> Show and tell.
• "Should we add a Rust port?" -> Discussion in General first. If it gains traction, RFC for the port spec.
• "Bug: axl-core crashes on empty input" -> Issue on axl-core repo, not Discussion here.

Mistakes to avoid

• Filing a bug as a Discussion (it should be an Issue)
• Filing an RFC as an Idea (RFC needs the comment window)
• Filing a question as an Issue (Q&A here is better - other people benefit from the answer)
• Filing an RFC without reading GOVERNANCE.md first

---

Questions about this? Reply below or open a Q&A.