commit 68409f344092d82e18fc469dfc7bad7014042824
parent 247f313b54296b3bb8ff02912279cc8b623c7fde
Author: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:14:03 +0100
docs: simplify contributing
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:02:00 +0100
From: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
To: dev@damus.io
Subject: Moving away from email code submissions
Hey there,
Since there are more people joining these days and the idea of training
everyone on how to do email code review is effectively impossible in
2024, I've decided to move away from them. I have scripts that can
convert github pull requests to do offline review on my end, so I no
longer need people to directly email them to me.
You of course can, but if you prefer to use github PRs then that is now
perfectly fine. I still may not use GitHub's code review interface, but
that is just me.
I want to encourage more code review from people other than me, if noone
is set up to do that via email then I would rather not encourage it.
Cheers,
Will
Signed-off-by: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
Diffstat:
| M | docs/CONTRIBUTING.md | | | 259 | +------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 258 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/CONTRIBUTING.md b/docs/CONTRIBUTING.md
@@ -1,24 +1,5 @@
# Contributing
-[Email patches][git-send-email] to patches@damus.io are preferred, but we
-accept PRs on GitHub as well. Patches sent via email may include a bolt11
-lightning invoice, choosing the price you think the patch is worth, and
-we will pay it once the patch is accepted and if I think the price isn't
-unreasonable. You can also send an any-amount invoice and I will pay what
-I think it's worth if you prefer not to choose. You can include the
-bolt11 in the commit body or email so that it can be paid once it is
-applied.
-
-Recommended settings when submitting code via email:
-
-```
-$ git config sendemail.to "patches@damus.io"
-$ git config format.subjectPrefix "PATCH damus"
-$ git config format.signOff yes
-```
-
-You can subscribe to the [patches mailing list][patches-ml] to help review code.
-
## Submitting patches
*Most of this comes from the linux kernel guidelines for submitting
@@ -44,20 +25,6 @@ long, that's a sign that you probably need to split up your patch. See
the dedicated `Separate your changes` section because this is very
important.
-When you submit or resubmit a patch or patch series, include the complete
-patch description and justification for it. Each new version should use
-the -v2,v3,vN option on git-send-email for each new patch revision. Don't
-just say that this is version N of the patch (series). Don't expect the
-reviewer to refer back to earlier patch versions or referenced URLs to
-find the patch description and put that into the patch. I.e., the patch
-(series) and its description should be self-contained. This benefits both
-the maintainers and reviewers. Some reviewers probably didn't even
-receive earlier versions of the patch.
-
-When submitting a -v2 of more than one patch, ensure that you include all of
-the original patches, don't just send a v2 of one of the patches. If you
-are dropping a patch, mention it in the `patch changelog`.
-
Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
@@ -113,10 +80,6 @@ The point to remember is that each patch should make an easily understood
change that can be verified by reviewers. Each patch should be justifiable
on its own merits.
-If one patch depends on another patch in order for a change to be
-complete, that is OK. Simply note **"this patch depends on patch X"**
-in your patch description.
-
When dividing your change into a series of patches, take special care to
ensure that the Damus builds and runs properly after each patch in the
series. Developers using ``git bisect`` to track down a problem can end
@@ -127,96 +90,7 @@ If you cannot condense your patch set into a smaller set of patches,
then only post say 15 or so at a time and wait for review and integration.
Include `patch changelogs` which describe what has changed between the v1 and
-v2 version of the patch. Please put this information **after** the `---` line
-which separates the changelog from the rest of the patch. The version
-information is not part of the changelog which gets committed to the git tree.
-It is additional information for the reviewers. If it's placed above the commit
-tags, it needs manual interaction to remove it. If it is below the separator
-line, it gets automatically stripped off when applying the patch::
-
- <commit message>
- ...
- Signed-off-by: Author <author@mail>
- ---
- V2 -> V3: Removed redundant helper function
- V1 -> V2: Cleaned up coding style and addressed review comments
-
- path/to/file | 5+++--
- ...
-
-
-### Select the recipients for your patch
-
-You should always copy the appropriate people on any patch to code that
-they may have been involved with. You can use
-[git-contacts][git-contacts] to find people who have touched the code
-previously:
-
- $ git format-patch --cover-letter -o patches origin/master..my-feature
- $ git send-email --dry-run --cc-cmd=git-contacts patches/*
-
-patches@damus.io should be used by default for all patches.
-
-William Casarin is the final arbiter of all changes accepted into the
-Damus. His email address is <jb55@jb55.com>.
-
-If you have a patch that fixes an exploitable security bug, send that
-patch to jb55@jb55.com. For severe bugs, a short embargo may be
-considered to allow distributors to get the patch out to users; in such
-cases, obviously, the patch should not be sent to any public lists.
-
-### No MIME, no links, no compression, no attachments. Just plain text.
-
-Will and other Damus developers need to be able to read and comment
-on the changes you are submitting. It is important for a Damus
-developer to be able to "quote" your changes, using standard e-mail
-tools, so that they may comment on specific portions of your code.
-
-For this reason, all patches should be submitted by e-mail "inline". The
-easiest way to do this is with `git send-email`, which is strongly
-recommended. An interactive tutorial for `git send-email` is available at
-[git-send-email][git-send-email]
-
-### Respond to review comments
-
-Your patch will almost certainly get comments from reviewers on ways in
-which the patch can be improved, in the form of a reply to your email. You must
-respond to those comments; ignoring reviewers is a good way to get ignored in
-return. You can simply reply to their emails to answer their comments. Review
-comments or questions that do not lead to a code change should almost certainly
-bring about a comment or changelog entry so that the next reviewer better
-understands what is going on.
-
-Be sure to tell the reviewers what changes you are making and to thank them
-for their time. Code review is a tiring and time-consuming process, and
-reviewers sometimes get grumpy. Even in that case, though, respond
-politely and address the problems they have pointed out. When sending a next
-version, add a `patch changelog` to the cover letter or to individual patches
-explaining difference against previous submission (see `The canonical patch format`)
-
-
-### Use trimmed interleaved replies in email discussions
-
-Top-posting is strongly discouraged in Damus development
-discussions. Interleaved (or "inline") replies make conversations much
-easier to follow. For more details see: [Posting style][posting-style]
-
-As is frequently quoted on the mailing list:
-
- A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
- Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
- Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
- A: Top-posting.
- Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
-
-Similarly, please trim all unneeded quotations that aren't relevant
-to your reply. This makes responses easier to find, and saves time and
-space. For more details see: http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
-
- A: No.
- Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
-
+v2 version of the patch.
### Sign your work - the Developer's Certificate of Origin
@@ -284,134 +158,3 @@ changelogs, please include:
The changelog script will pick these up and give you attribution for your
change
-### When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-developed-by:
-
-The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
-development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
-
-If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
-patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
-ask to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
-
-Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
-maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch.
-
-Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker
-has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch
-mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me"
-into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an
-explicit ack).
-
-Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire patch.
-For example, if a patch affects multiple subsystems and has an Acked-by: from
-one subsystem maintainer then this usually indicates acknowledgement of just
-the part which affects that maintainer's code. Judgement should be used here.
-When in doubt people should refer to the original discussion in the mailing
-list archives.
-
-If a person has had the opportunity to comment on a patch, but has not
-provided such comments, you may optionally add a ``Cc:`` tag to the patch.
-This is the only tag which might be added without an explicit action by the
-person it names - but it should indicate that this person was copied on the
-patch. This tag documents that potentially interested parties
-have been included in the discussion.
-
-Co-developed-by: states that the patch was co-created by multiple developers;
-it is used to give attribution to co-authors (in addition to the author
-attributed by the From: tag) when several people work on a single patch.
-
-### Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by:, Suggested-by: and Fixes:
-
-The Reported-by tag gives credit to people who find bugs and report them and it
-hopefully inspires them to help us again in the future. The tag is intended for
-bugs; please do not use it to credit feature requests. The tag should be
-followed by a Closes: tag pointing to the report, unless the report is not
-available on the web. The Link: tag can be used instead of Closes: if the patch
-fixes a part of the issue(s) being reported. Please note that if the bug was
-reported in private, then ask for permission first before using the Reported-by
-tag.
-
-A Tested-by: tag indicates that the patch has been successfully tested (in
-some environment) by the person named. This tag informs maintainers that
-some testing has been performed, provides a means to locate testers for
-future patches, and ensures credit for the testers.
-
-Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that the patch has been reviewed and found
-acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement:
-
-A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an
-appropriate modification of Damus and related libraries without any
-remaining serious technical issues. Any interested reviewer (who has
-done the work) can offer a Reviewed-by tag for a patch. This tag serves
-to give credit to reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of
-review which has been done on the patch. Reviewed-by: tags, when
-supplied by reviewers known to understand the subject area and to perform
-thorough reviews, will normally increase the likelihood of your patch
-getting into Damus.
-
-Both Tested-by and Reviewed-by tags, once received on mailing list from tester
-or reviewer, should be added by author to the applicable patches when sending
-next versions. However if the patch has changed substantially in following
-version, these tags might not be applicable anymore and thus should be removed.
-Usually removal of someone's Tested-by or Reviewed-by tags should be mentioned
-in the patch changelog (after the '---' separator).
-
-A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person
-named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this
-tag should not be added without the reporter's permission, especially if the
-idea was not posted in a public forum. That said, if we diligently credit our
-idea reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired to help us again in the
-future.
-
-### Explicit In-Reply-To headers
-
-It can be helpful to manually add In-Reply-To: headers to a patch
-(e.g., when using ``git send-email``) to associate the patch with
-previous relevant discussion, e.g. to link a bug fix to the email with
-the bug report. However, for a multi-patch series, it is generally
-best to avoid using In-Reply-To: to link to older versions of the
-series. This way multiple versions of the patch don't become an
-unmanageable forest of references in email clients.
-
-### Providing base tree information
-
-When other developers receive your patches and start the review process,
-it is often useful for them to know where in the tree history they
-should place your work. This is particularly useful for automated CI
-processes that attempt to run a series of tests in order to establish
-the quality of your submission before the maintainer starts the review.
-
-If you are using `git format-patch` to generate your patches, you can
-automatically include the base tree information in your submission by
-using the `--base` flag. The easiest and most convenient way to use
-this option is with topical branches:
-
- $ git checkout -t -b my-topical-branch master
- Branch 'my-topical-branch' set up to track local branch 'master'.
- Switched to a new branch 'my-topical-branch'
-
- [perform your edits and commits]
-
- $ git format-patch --base=auto --cover-letter -o outgoing/ master
- outgoing/0000-cover-letter.patch
- outgoing/0001-First-Commit.patch
- outgoing/...
-
-When you open `outgoing/0000-cover-letter.patch` for editing, you will
-notice that it will have the `base-commit:` trailer at the very
-bottom, which provides the reviewer and the CI tools enough information
-to properly perform `git am` without worrying about conflicts::
-
- $ git checkout -b patch-review [base-commit-id]
- Switched to a new branch 'patch-review'
- $ git am patches.mbox
- Applying: First Commit
- Applying: ...
-
-Please see ``man git-format-patch`` for more information about this
-option.
-
-[git-contacts]: https://github.com/git/git/blob/master/contrib/contacts/git-contacts
-[git-send-email]: http://git-send-email.io
-[patches-ml]: https://damus.io/list/patches
-[posting-style]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
