docs: 更新了贡献指南和 pr 模板

[teacher-zhou]

• ci: 增加了给 pr 打 label 的脚本
• ci: 增加了 pr 语义检查脚本
• ci: 增加冲突检查脚本
• docs: 更新了 contributing.md
• docs: 更新了 pr 模板

[github-actions[bot]]

Unit Test Results

:green_circle:  Tests Passed      |      :stopwatch: 3.8s

:memo: Total	:heavy_check_mark: Passed	:x: Failed	:warning: Skipped
93	93	0	0

:pencil2: updated for commit cfe03fb5

[github-actions[bot]]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/9912693796

[github-actions[bot]]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/9912760733

[github-actions[bot]]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/9912948536

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated[bot]]

This PR has 166 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

``` Label : Medium Size : +97 -69 Percentile : 53.2% Total files changed: 7 Change summary by file extension: .md : +41 -69 .yml : +35 -0 .github/workflows/pr-conflict : +21 -0 ``` > Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the [PullRequestQuantifier customizations](https://github.com/microsoft/PullRequestQuantifier/blob/main/docs/prquantifier-yaml.md).

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean: - Fast and predictable releases to production: - Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer iterations. - Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times. - Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower: - Bugs are more likely to be detected. - Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected. - Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants: - Small portions can be assimilated better. - Better engineering practices are exercised: - Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems. - Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes. #### What can I do to optimize my changes - Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately - Create a context profile for your repo using the [context generator](https://github.com/microsoft/PullRequestQuantifier/releases) - Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the `Excluded` section from your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Only use the labels that matter to you, [see context specification](./docs/prquantifier-yaml.md) to customize your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Change your engineering behaviors - For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if: - Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead - Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR). #### How to interpret the change counts in git diff output - One line was added: `+1 -0` - One line was deleted: `+0 -1` - One line was modified: `+1 -1` (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion) - Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification) of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? :thumbsup:  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email) Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[github-actions[bot]]

查看测试结果 https://github.com/AchievedOwner/TDesignBlazor/runs/9913427569