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.

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

docs: refactor contributing guidelines - add development setup #2708

Conversation

crodriguezvega
Copy link
Contributor

Description

closes: #XXXX


Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

  • Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md)
  • Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
  • Code follows the module structure standards.
  • Wrote unit and integration tests
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/)
  • Added relevant godoc comments.
  • Added a relevant changelog entry to the Unreleased section in CHANGELOG.md
  • Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer
  • Review Codecov Report in the comment section below once CI passes

Copy link
Contributor

@colin-axner colin-axner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, mostly added suggestions on how we can simplify this file. I think it is valuable to consider if there are any parts that can be cut out

Copy link
Contributor

@damiannolan damiannolan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approved pending minor changes! 🚀
Thanks for all the effort on these docs! ❤️

Copy link
Contributor

@colin-axner colin-axner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK, thanks :)


We use [Go 1.14 Modules](https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Modules) to manage dependency versions.

The main branch of every Cosmos repository should just build with `go get`, which means they should be kept up-to-date with their dependencies, so we can get away with telling people they can just `go get` our software.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
The main branch of every Cosmos repository should just build with `go get`, which means they should be kept up-to-date with their dependencies, so we can get away with telling people they can just `go get` our software.
The main branch of every Cosmos repository should just build with `go get`, which means they should be kept up-to-date with their dependencies, so we can get away with telling people they can just `go get` our software.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not sure how useful this section is. I feel like go get is something every go module makes use of?

Copy link
Contributor

@chatton chatton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, my main concern was the usage of GOPATH, please let me know if this is required for some reason.

Comment on lines +65 to +66
Please make sure to run `make format` before every commit - the easiest way to do this is have your editor run it for you upon saving a file. Additionally please ensure that your code is lint compliant by running `make lint-fix` (requires `golangci-lint`).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

more of a question, maybe we should set up pre-commit hooks to do this sort of thing instead of requiring additional manual steps. I'm happy with this as is for now!

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds like a good idea! We can investigative this separately. I will leave this for now.

Copy link
Contributor

@chatton chatton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@crodriguezvega crodriguezvega merged commit 675714b into carlos/1747-readme-revamp-contributing Jan 18, 2023
@crodriguezvega crodriguezvega deleted the carlos/1747-contributing-development-setup branch January 18, 2023 10:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants