search

ros-industrial / ros_industrial_issues

Repository for tracking common ROS-Industrial issuses.
3 stars 4 forks source link

Add links to contribution guidelines using Githubs infrastructure #26

Open gavanderhoorn opened 10 years ago

gavanderhoorn commented 10 years ago

Github parses CONTRIBUTING(.md) files in repositories and displays a link to such a file at the top of all pull requests and the new issue page (see [1]).

We could use this to direct people to the ROS-I coding and pull request standards / guidelines.

gavanderhoorn commented 6 years ago

Related: #39.

tfoote commented 6 years ago

I've opened PRs to add or update CONTRIBUTING.md to all the repos that have been recently touched.

tfoote commented 6 years ago

A good suggestion that this should be generally updated to mention the new Github review process: https://github.com/ros-industrial/abb/pull/153#pullrequestreview-136511382

tfoote commented 6 years ago

The content I submitted was: https://gist.github.com/tfoote/9f38576e148c82f86aa7e6871104a77f

It's a markdown version of https://rosindustrial.org/developmentprocess/

I'm not going to have time to follow up on most of these after wrid18.

gavanderhoorn commented 6 years ago

everyone in ROS-I: could you hold off on merging the PRs submitted by @tfoote? As commented in https://github.com/ros-industrial/abb/pull/153#pullrequestreview-136511382, the PRs are based on the Development Process page, but that hasn't been updated to use the 'new' Github review system.

shaun-edwards commented 5 years ago

I'm inclined to accept the PRs as is. The steps are in spirit of Github AND having a CONTRIBUTING file is better than not having it. It looks like @Levi-Armstrong has already moved forward with @tfoote's version.

gavanderhoorn commented 5 years ago

Yes, but we've also received comments by community members (such as those in https://github.com/ros-industrial/abb/pull/153#pullrequestreview-136511382) that are valid.

And I don't necessarily agree that having a CONTRIBUTING.md is better than not having one: having a process is important. The file itself is not.

mathias-luedtke commented 5 years ago

It might have been better to agree one a consolidated version beforehand in a central place. (Same story as with #55)

We could discuss an improved version now, however not spread in 20+ PRs. I would suggest to open one PR in a (to be created?) repository with common templates etc. After a reasonable amount of time (2 weeks?) we could update the other PRs based on this new template.

tfoote commented 5 years ago

A draft was precirculated in the wrid2018 IRC prior to posting. But no one caught that the last paragraph was out of date. Note that the file itself is somewhat important as Github uses it in it's user interaction prompts which will help new and learning contributors.

gavanderhoorn commented 5 years ago

@ipa-mdl wrote:

I would suggest to open one PR in a (to be created?) repository with common templates etc.

Would that be something you would be willing to do @ipa-mdl?

I can create the repository for you.

gavanderhoorn commented 5 years ago

Unassigning @tfoote as it's no longer his task.

Thanks @tfoote for all the PRs.

We'll need to take a good look at this during wrid19, so marking this issue as one for that day.