ashley/tldr
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr.git synced 2024-10-30 16:18:20 +01:00
Code Activity
tldr/contributing-guides/maintainers-guide.md
Waldir Pimenta 4e245b2b17 Update maintainers-guide.md
2018-01-30 13:56:20 +08:00

4.7 KiB
Raw Blame History

Maintainer's guide

The following guidelines are meant to provide a general basis for the behavior expected of tldr-pages maintainers.

Note: This text is a living standard; that is, it is meant to describe the project's maintenance practices, rather than prescribe them. As a maintainer, you're expected to refer to it for clarifications about the collaborative workflows of the project, but also to propose changes to it that you feel would make it more useful as a guideline for current and future maintainers.

I. Responding to contributions

  • When responding to issues or pull requests, remember that you're temporarily the face of the tldr-pages project. Be welcoming and friendly, and if you don't know how to answer, ping other maintainers who you think might have a say.

  • Help keep the project responsive. New discussion threads (issues or pull requests) should receive a response within 3 days, ideally. You can respond yourself or ask other members to provide their thoughts/opinions. In addition, if possible, try to hang around in the Gitter chat room on a regular basis as well, or at least show up every now and then.

  • Know when and how to say no. Sometimes requests or contributions need to be declined, at least in their current form. The project has developed multiple guidelines over time to handle edge cases — get acquainted with them, and point them out when necessary. Be polite, but firm: it saves everyone's time and patience to make expectations clear early.

  • Always remember to thank every contribution, even when it can't be accepted (in fact, especially then). Keep in mind that every form of contribution (pull request, feature request, bug report, etc.) is a voluntary gift of time offered to the tldr project by someone who cares about it, so make sure it's clear that that we don't take it for granted.

  • Try to keep the entire contribution process web-based, if possible, to ensure it is accessible and straightforward. If you're comfortable with git, consider offering to perform interactive rebases or other command-line operations on behalf of contributors, or assisting them if they want to do it themselves.

II. Handling PRs

  • PRs should be merged once they (1) pass the automated tests (Travis CI, CLA signing, etc.), (2) have the review comments addressed, and (3) get approved reviews by two maintainers (the second maintainer can perform the merge immediately after accepting.)

  • If a PR fails to get a review from a second maintainer after a few days, the first maintainer should ping others for review. If it still lingers around for over a week without a second maintainer’s approval, the first maintainer can go ahead and merge it.

  • If the only issues holding up a merge are trivial fixes (typos, syntax errors, etc.), and the author doesn't respond in a day or two, maintainers can make the necessary changes themselves, and proceed with the merge process.

  • If a PR stops getting feedback from the submitter and is marked as stale by probot-stale, any maintainer can choose to take over the PR and make the necessary changes to get the content ready for merging.

  • During the review process, make sure that contributors, especially new ones, are not overwhelmed with too many change requests. Be mindful of signs of fatigue (less enthusiastic responses, slower reactions), and relax review standards if necessary — minor issues can always be fixed later.

  • When merging PRs, use the merge strategy that produces a clean git history: If there's a single commit in the PR, or if the multiple commits are not semantically independent changes, use the Squash and merge method. (Don't forget to clean up the body of the squashed commit message.) If instead the PR author took the time to craft individual, informative messages for each commit, then use the Rebase and merge method, to honor that work and preserve the history of the changes. For less clear-cut cases, a simple heuristic you can follow is that if there are more "dirty" commits than "clean" commits, then prefer squash, else do a rebase.

  • Although having push access allows committing directly to the repository, please create pull requests for all of your changes, except the simplest ones (e.g. typo fixes). This ensures that the entire process that regular contributors go through is also exposed to maintainers, who can then identify and address bottlenecks or inconveniences. Similarly, avoid merging your own PRs unless approved by other maintainers.