Enhanced Contributing Guide #4751
Conversation
|
Very happy to see this addition :) Hopefully that should stem the flood of similar / old issues 🎉 |
|
|
||
| ### Issue Lifecycle | ||
|
|
||
| 1. The issue is reported. | ||
|
|
||
| 2. The issue is verified and categorized by a Terraform collaborator. | ||
| Categorization is done via tags. For example, bugs are marked as "bugs". | ||
| Categorization is done via GitHub labels. We generally use a two-label | ||
| system of (1) issue/PR type, and (2) section of the codebase. Type is |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know this may sound like a nitpick, but often I'm questioning myself whether it's enough to tag issue/PR with docs & type (provider/provisioner/core) or whether I'm also expected to tag this with enhancement or bug depending on the nature of docs update - i.e. undocumented or incorrectly documented feature would be bug, adding a new section would be enhancement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. Will mention documentation as a first class "issue/PR type" - I noticed on a read-through this afternoon that docs updates are not addressed w/ checklists. Pushing revision to call those out specifically. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The other class I think we should call out explicitly is question - whilst we may prefer they come up on the mailing list or in IRC they often do appear in issues. Arguably we could treat every question as a documentation, bug or enhancement type, but it seems to me these should be considered separately in some cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a bad idea. Will call out questions in a follow up PR.
This is a vastly expanded and clarified Contributing guide. It includes guidelines for each type of contribution and issue report that are designed to be linked off to from issue / PR comments. We expect the text will continue to evolve as we learn what works and what doesn't. This guide will coincide with a HashiCorp blog post explaining the motivation and context around these changes: https://github.com/hashicorp/www/pull/160
phinze
force-pushed
the
phinze/enhanced-contributing-guidelines
branch
from
17c84ac to
6bd60a9
Compare
…guidelines Enhanced Contributing Guide
|
I really like this. Especially the advice about writing acceptance tests and offering help to people that aren't able to run them. The README section about acceptance tests being optional and only for convenience has concerned me in the past. Now that you have nightly testing and this clearer advice, should the README be re-worded and/or reference this instead? Sorry to comment on a closed PR, instead of opening a PR of my own, but I wasn't sure what the exact wording should be. |
|
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further. |
ghost
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
This is a vastly expanded and clarified Contributing guide. It includes
guidelines for each type of contribution and issue report that are
designed to be linked off to from issue / PR comments.
We expect the text will continue to evolve as we learn what works and
what doesn't.
This guide will coincide with a HashiCorp blog post explaining the
motivation and context around these changes:
https://github.com/hashicorp/www/pull/160