docs: fix formatting and order of contribution guide content

[gitcommitshow]

What are the changes introduced in this PR?

Improve contribution guide based on the latest feedback.
Add more info for destination test, fix issues in comprehensiveness, add table of content, fix formatting, etc.

What is the related Linear task?

No Linear ASK created

Please explain the objectives of your changes below

Improve comprehensiveness of contribution guide

Any changes to existing capabilities/behaviour, mention the reason & what are the changes ?

N/A

Any new dependencies introduced with this change?

N/A

Any new generic utility introduced or modified. Please explain the changes.

N/A

Any technical or performance related pointers to consider with the change?

N/A

@coderabbitai review

---

Developer checklist

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project

• No breaking changes are being introduced.

• All related docs linked with the PR?

• All changes manually tested?

• Any documentation changes needed with this change?

• Is the PR limited to 10 file changes?

• Is the PR limited to one linear task?

• Are relevant unit and component test-cases added in new readability format?

Reviewer checklist

• Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?

• Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.

[devops-github-rudderstack]

Test report for this run is available at: https://test-integrations-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/integrations-test-reports/rudder-transformer/3880/test-report.html

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.50%. Comparing base (e90d2ad) to head (47eb025).
Report is 52 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3880      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    89.05%   90.50%   +1.44%     
===========================================
  Files          618      620       +2     
  Lines        33071    32518     -553     
  Branches      7814     7710     -104     
===========================================
- Hits         29452    29429      -23     
+ Misses        3336     2865     -471     
+ Partials       283      224      -59     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[krishna2020]

As v0 API got deprecated now, we can suggest to write in v1 spec

[gitcommitshow]

Fixed it. Now we are directing contributors towards src/v1/sources for source integration. But we still use example of v0 source integration.

@krishna2020 What are the key differences between v0 vs v1 source integration a contributor must know? Context: Currently, I am using a v0 source integration example (Slack) in this guide, I want to understand what additional changes are required in the guide given that now we've updated steps to direct contributors towards src/v1?

[gitcommitshow]

Another follow up question: Are we planning to migrate current v0 sources to v1?

[krishna2020]

v1 will additionally have source config also as an input along with the event
We already highlighted this in the recent server transformer matrix docs
Yes, migration for v0 sources is also in the plan

[gitcommitshow]

Understood. The difference is in the process function signature (arguments)

• v0 - process(event)
• v1 - process({ event: eventData, source: sourceConfigData }
• And in v2, we will replace event with request

And the output type is same in all these versions?

So the best solution is to simply use v1 source example to avoid any confusion. Which will require a major change in the first section of this content. How about we merge this PR for now, and then I raise another PR replacing v0 source example with v1 source example?

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud