diff --git a/accepted/0000-yarn-documentation.md b/accepted/0000-yarn-documentation.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c5ccf4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/accepted/0000-yarn-documentation.md
@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+- Start Date: 2018-10-21
+- Updated: 2019-07-14
+- RFC PR:
+- Yarn Issue:
+
+# Summary
+
+I want to add the option to add ddocumentation for packages and their chosen version ranges.
+
+# Motivation
+
+My team and I found ourselves with the need to document why some packages got
+pinned down to specific versions.
+
+## Examples where a feature like this is missing
+
+1. We took a decision to stay with React 15 and not to migrate to React 16 and
+this lead to many packages staying on older versions as well.
+
+There's currently no convenient way to signal the next developer who would like to
+upgrade the versions of packages in the project, that they should keep
+some on older versions and why they should do it.
+
+2. Sometimes a bug is found even in minor version updates of packages and there is
+no convenient way to signal developers why a package was pinned to a certain minor version.
+
+for example:
+```
+"some-package": "1.0.4"
+```
+Where `1.0.6` is available.
+
+A developer that sees this kind of version pin usually starts investigating the
+git history and people who are involved in the pinning of the package.
+
+3. We had a few cases, where we cloned a repository and fixed or modified an npm library.
+
+For the time between our new code is ready and the time it's merged(sometimes it takes weeks or months)
+We used our forked git repository as the version of the package:
+```
+"some-package": "github:user/repo"
+```
+There's currently no convenient way to document when should the git repository URL be replaced
+with the newest version of a package like this (probably when the corresponding PR is merged).
+
+4. Some packages appear in package.json to be installed in node_modules for the sake
+of being used by other libraries and they are not used in the source code of the
+project itself.
+
+It's very tempting to delete such packages because they are "not used anywhere" but a
+convenient way to document this could be very benefitial to the user.
+
+5. Some packages has breaking changes in their new versions that are not easy to
+cope with. In that case, it would be useful to signal a developer there's a ticket to upgrade
+that specific package and what work has been done on it.
+
+# Detailed design
+
+My idea is to save the documentation of packages in an additional optional per package `package.json` entry
+with the following data structure:
+```
+"dependencies-documentation": {
+  "some-package": "this package is used by some-package-b",
+  "some-package-b@1.1.3": "pinned because of the following bug: http://www.github.com/package/issues/20"
+}
+```
+Upon running commands like `yarn upgrade` or `yarn upgrade-interactive`, comments
+would appear to the user as info and warnings and confirmations about pinned versions
+would run.
+
+Upon running commands like `yarn remove` the package's comment would appear and if the
+the user still wants to delete it, it would also be deleted from `dependencies-documentation`.
+
+If a package gets deleted manually and `yarn` is run where it is still in `dependencies-documentation`
+the comment should be shown to the user with a prompt to delete it or add it back.
+
+Warnings should aslo run if there is a version mismatch between the package's version in `package.json`
+and `dependencies-documentation`.
+
+All these features would only run if `dependencies-documentation` is added manually by the user.
+
+If the user doesnt add this field manually, nothing should change in how `yarn` works.
+ 
+# How We Teach This
+
+I believe adding it to the documentation and adding a message to
+`yarn upgrade` and `yarn upgrade-interactive` that would suggest the user use it with a link to the
+documentation is enough.
+
+# Drawbacks
+
+Having versions appear in two places can be problematic both for users and for certain
+commands.
+
+# Alternatives
+
+* I thought to use a simple "packages.md" file or adding it to the readme, but then it
+gets lost and it's too easy to miss.
+
+* Adding comments to package.json could work but it's not possible because too many tools
+expect this file to be a simple JSON and not not a JSON5 file.
+
+* Another option would be to use repository commits messages to keep track of commits where package.json got
+modified, but this can also be missed and not easy to maintain.
+
+* Simply adding this field to `package.json` without any enforcing from `yarn` might be enough
+but 
+
+* We can use an extra library to do this work. But it feels importent enough to be added to `yarn` as a native feature.