Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update contributing.md with new merge policy #2789

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Nov 14, 2018
Merged

Update contributing.md with new merge policy #2789

Changes from 6 commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
51a91cd
Update contribuiting.md with new merge policy
jackzampolin Nov 12, 2018
7d13028
Add note about documentation updates
jackzampolin Nov 12, 2018
72142a6
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
alexanderbez Nov 12, 2018
4e52ad6
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
rigelrozanski Nov 12, 2018
3804e0a
Address PR comments
jackzampolin Nov 13, 2018
303f264
Address PR comments
jackzampolin Nov 13, 2018
3b29591
Add peer review comment (#2811)
jackzampolin Nov 14, 2018
c76fb6c
Address PR comments
jackzampolin Nov 14, 2018
11ce509
Address PR comments
jackzampolin Nov 14, 2018
bbf8cca
Update CONTRIBUTING.md
gamarin2 Nov 14, 2018
20b2e07
Address @gamarin's comments
jackzampolin Nov 14, 2018
dca52ff
Merge branch 'develop' into jack/contrib
jackzampolin Nov 14, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
43 changes: 30 additions & 13 deletions CONTRIBUTING.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,40 +1,40 @@
# Contributing

Thank you for considering making contributions to Cosmos-SDK and related
repositories!
repositories!

Contributing to this repo can mean many things such as participated in
discussion or proposing code changes. To ensure a smooth workflow for all
contributors, the general procedure for contributing has been established:

1. either [open](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues/new/choose) or
[find](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues) an issue you'd like to help with,
2. participate in thoughtful discussion on that issue,
[find](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues) an issue you'd like to help with,
2. participate in thoughtful discussion on that issue,
3. if you would then like to contribute code:
1. if a the issue is a proposal, ensure that the proposal has been accepted,
1. if a the issue is a proposal, ensure that the proposal has been accepted,
2. ensure that nobody else has already begun working on this issue, if they have
make sure to contact them to collaborate,
make sure to contact them to collaborate,
3. if nobody has been assigned the issue and you would like to work on it
make a comment on the issue to inform the community of your intentions
to begin work,
to begin work,
4. follow standard github best practices: fork the repo, branch from the
tip of `develop`, make some commits, and submit a PR to `develop`,
tip of `develop`, make some commits, and submit a PR to `develop`,
5. include `WIP:` in the PR-title to and submit your PR early, even if it's
incomplete, this indicates to the community you're working on something and
allows them to provide comments early in the development process. When the code
is complete it can be marked as ready-for-review by replacing `WIP:` with
`R4R:` in the PR-title.
`R4R:` in the PR-title.

Note that for very small or blatantly obvious problems (such as typos) it is
Note that for very small or blatantly obvious problems (such as typos) it is
not required to an open issue to submit a PR, but be aware that for more complex
problems/features, if a PR is opened before an adequate design discussion has
taken place in a github issue, that PR runs a high likelihood of being rejected.
taken place in a github issue, that PR runs a high likelihood of being rejected.

Take a peek at our [coding repo](https://github.com/tendermint/coding) for
overall information on repository workflow and standards. Note, we use `make
get_dev_tools` and `make update_dev_tools` for installing the linting tools.

Other notes:
Other notes:
- Looking for a good place to start contributing? How about checking out some
[good first
issues](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22good+first+issue%22)
Expand All @@ -44,9 +44,26 @@ Other notes:

## Pull Requests

To accommodate review process we suggest that PRs are categorically broken up.
To accommodate review process we suggest that PRs are categorically broken up.
Ideally each PR addresses only a single issue. Additionally, as much as possible
code refactoring and cleanup should be submitted as a separate PRs from bugfixes/feature-additions.
code refactoring and cleanup should be submitted as a separate PRs from bugfixes/feature-additions.

### Process for Reviewing PRs

All PRs require 2 Reviews before merge. When reviewing PRs please use the following review explanations:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

reviews (no capitalization)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Strange. I had made a suggestion and now it's gone.

Copy link
Contributor

@rigelrozanski rigelrozanski Nov 14, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thinking about this more - do we really want two reviews for all PRs - for instance I think

  • doc change PRs is sufficient with one approval.
  • variable name change PRs I think are also sufficient with a single approval.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point @rigelrozanski. I'll incorporate this.


- `LGTM` without an explicit approval means that the changes look good, but you haven't pulled down the code, run tests locally and thoroughly reviewed it.
- `Approval` through the GH UI means that you understand the code, documentation/spec is updated in the right places, you have pulled down and tested the code locally.
alexanderbez marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

K so I guess the only funny issue, is when you perform a "request changes" the only way to override that is via an approve right? If that's the case then maybe you want to "approve" something in the github sense to indicate that you're satisfied with the changes made, however this doesn't mean you've reviewed it deeply.... For that reason I think we may still need DeepAck

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the answer here is only Approve if you have fully reviewed the changes. If you Request Changes that would mean you need to fully review to Approve which seems like a good policy (if you know enough to request changes on the PR, then you should also be able to review it fully). Thoughts?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yup that sounds fine, so I guess if you are making only "surface level" reviews, you can submit your review as a "comment" instead of a "request changes"

want to incorporate that idea into this section?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

you can also dismiss your review after you request changes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we add a few more points for reviewers:

  • You must also think through anything which ought to be included but is not
  • You must think through whether any added code could be partially combined (DRYed) with existing code
  • You must think through any potential security issues or incentive-compatibility flaws introduced by the changes

- If you are only making "surface level" reviews, submit any notes as `Comments` without adding a review.

### A Note on Documentation Updates
jackzampolin marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

If you open a PR on the Cosmos SDK, it is mandatory to update the relevant documentation in /docs.

* If your change relates to the core SDK (baseapp, store, ...), please update the docs/gaia folder, the docs/examples folder and possibly the docs/spec folder.
* If your changes relate specifically to the gaia application (not including modules), please modify the docs/gaia folder.
* If your changes relate to a module, please update the module's spec in docs/spec. If the module is used by gaia and/or basecoin, you might also need to modify docs/gaia and/or docs/examples.
* If your changes relate to the core of the CLI or Light-client (not specifically to module's CLI/Rest), please modify the docs/clients folder.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this section meant to be duplicate of the update docs/DOCS_README ?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. We might just want to point that file to this spot in the CONTRIBUTING.md doc


## Forking

Expand Down