docs(community): add contributor onboarding and issue templates - #49
docs(community): add contributor onboarding and issue templates#49Timur Tukaev (tym83) wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Caution The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub has been sunset. All code review activity has officially ceased. |
|
Important Review skippedDraft detected. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Nothing told a newcomer what to do first. The material exists but is split in two places and neither is addressed to a first-time contributor: the website Developer Guide explains platform internals and per-package make targets, while docs/agents/contributing.md holds the actual commit, sign-off, regeneration and PR conventions behind a title that reads as if it were not meant for humans. contributors/README.md is a standalone walkthrough built from both: pick a task, work out which environment the change actually needs (most first contributions need no cluster at all — the three-QEMU-VM setup is only for end-to-end work), set up the fork, regenerate what is generated, verify, commit, rebase, open the PR, and what to expect afterwards. It states plainly that build jobs failing on fork PRs are our registry problem rather than the contributor's, and that a bot comment is not a review. The downstream trigger map and the review-thread query stay where they are and are linked rather than copied. Add issue templates for governance and community topics — the README routes both here, but the repo offered only a blank issue. Signed-off-by: Timur Tukaev <timur.tukaev@aenix.io>
dd163d3 to
6443590
Compare
|
Reviewed against the actual tree (Makefile, workflows, Blocking, an undocumented commitment. "A human response is due within two business days" is not written down anywhere in the repo. Fix, CI mechanism named wrong. "CI runs Non-blocking:
|
2 participants
Summary
Nothing in the project told a newcomer what to do first. The material exists, but
it is split in two places and neither is addressed to a first-time contributor:
the website Developer Guide
explains platform internals and per-package
maketargets, whiledocs/agents/contributing.mdholds the actual commit, sign-off, regeneration and pull-request conventions
behind a title that reads as if it were not meant for humans.
What
contributors/README.md— a standalone walkthrough assembled from bothsources, in the order a contributor needs it: pick a task, work out which
environment the change requires, set up the fork, regenerate what is generated,
verify, commit, rebase, open the PR, and what to expect afterwards.
Three things it says that were not written down anywhere:
dashboards and docs need nothing but Go and Docker. Only end-to-end work needs
the three-QEMU-VM setup at 8 vCPU and 24 GiB each. Contributors were previously
left to discover the 72 GiB requirement themselves, or assume it applied to
everything.
contributor's. Forks cannot authenticate to the image registry, so any build
job that pushes an image fails regardless of the change. Two currently approved
external PRs are red for exactly this reason.
CodeRabbit or Gemini, and several got no human response at all. The document
states that a human answer is due within two business days and that chasing it
is legitimate.
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/governance.mdandcommunity.md— the READMEroutes governance, process and community matters to this repo, but the repo
offered only a blank issue. Both templates are short: what the issue is, where it
shows up, what should happen. The governance template asks for both the written
rule and the actual behaviour when the two disagree.
config.yml— two new contact links, for the onboarding guide and thecommunity meeting.
Why
Deliberately not a rewrite of the existing documentation. The downstream trigger
map and the
gh api graphqlrecipe for unresolved review threads stay indocs/agents/contributing.mdand are linked, not copied — one copy, one owner.What is duplicated here is only the material a newcomer cannot proceed without.