rfc(decision): Mobile - Tracing Without Performance V2

README.md

@@ -64,3 +64,4 @@ This repository contains RFCs and DACIs. Lost?
 - [0126-sdk-spans-aggregator](text/0126-sdk-spans-aggregator.md): SDK Spans Aggregator
 - [0129-video-replay-envelope](text/0129-video-replay-envelope.md): Video-based replay envelope format
 - [0131-pass-native-sdk-spans-to-hybrid](text/0131-pass-native-sdk-spans-to-hybrid.md): rfc(feature): Pass Native SDKs Spans to Hybrid
+- [0136-mobile-tracing-without-performance-v-2](text/0136-mobile-tracing-without-performance-v-2.md): Mobile - Tracing Without Performance V2

text/0136-mobile-tracing-without-performance-v-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+- Start Date: 2024-06-04
+- RFC Type: decision
+- RFC PR: https://github.com/getsentry/rfcs/pull/136
+- RFC Status: draft
+
+# Summary
+
+One paragraph explanation of the feature or document purpose.
+
+# Motivation
+
+Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome?
+
+# Background
+
+The reason this decision or document is required. This section might not always exist.
+
+# Supporting Data
+
+[Metrics to help support your decision (if applicable).]
+
+# Options Considered
+
+If an RFC does not know yet what the options are, it can propose multiple options. The
+preferred model is to propose one option and to provide alternatives.
+
+# Drawbacks
+
+Why should we not do this? What are the drawbacks of this RFC or a particular option if
+multiple options are presented.
+
+# Unresolved questions
+
+- What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through this RFC?
+- What issues are out of scope for this RFC but are known?