Contributors don't know the exact contribution guidelines

[teras]

Describe the bug

A clear and concise description of what a contributor should put as a commit message. Although there's an error message that describes it, even if following its guidelines, it's not enough.

For example #232

To Reproduce

Create a new pull request and follow the vague error guidelines.

Expected behavior

A CONTRIBUTION.md file should be updated with the minimum requirements on how to contribute to TC. Now it's too complicated,

[acmlira]

We already have some clear guidelines in my opinion:

https://github.com/TotalCross/totalcross/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#commiting

I see some problems like the wrong commit example and the types of commit require a more macroscopic and complex view (what we could make clearer by giving some options or setting a list of possible types).

[teras]

In my opinion as an outsider, it is not

• There's no list of "types". What are valid types? Could it be more than one word? Can I have my own?
• The 80 chars are inclusive the type? I thought not, but I was wrong (so, one more commit/force push cycle for me)
• I tried to put a body, without luck
• There are no "minimum requirements". Too much text about why etc, everyone agrees that it's required, no need to explain. Just the facts. This is a full essay that isn't even linked on the commit error message.

I know I am nitpicking, but if I and @VicMisael have issues, I am 100% certain that many many others might have ( remember #170 issues)

[acmlira]

That's it! I agree with many of them and here is my suggestion for changes:

• Answer those questions you asked;
• Minimum requirements section;
• Fix commit sample;
• Be explicit about the commit body.

[acmlira]

Hello you all, I also think that we need a list of commit types. My suggestion:

• doc if the change is related to documentation;
• api whether the change is related to the Java API;
• lib if the change is related to the libtcvm.so. In my point of view vm is not semantically complete for what we have;
• cicd if the change is related to CI/CD;
• build build 😅;
• fix fixing faults, errors or bugs;

They are simple and relatively broad categories, but you can explain better your changes in body section 😄

Keep it simple

[teras]

I like these categories, there might be more things missing, but for now let's not bloat it. Start with these and see if we add more and/or deprecate some others.

I'd also suggest the following emojis which will replace the textual with the image:

doc → 📝 api → ☕ lib → ⚙️ cicd → 👷 build → 🛠️ fix → 🐛

[nmarquesin]

If the commit is related to a new feature, for instance, a new TC component, should it go under api ☕?