Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore(contributing): delete link #21990

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 1, 2024
Merged

Conversation

harryMaksim
Copy link
Contributor

@harryMaksim harryMaksim commented Sep 30, 2024

same to #21838

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Restructured and updated the CONTRIBUTING.md file to clarify the contribution process.
    • Expanded table of contents with detailed sections on development procedures, testing, pull requests, accountability, and architectural decision records.
    • Enhanced guidelines for submitting draft pull requests and outlined responsibilities for owners and reviewers.
    • Updated dependencies section to reflect Go Modules and provided tooling details for Protocol Buffers.

@harryMaksim harryMaksim requested a review from a team as a code owner September 30, 2024 19:11
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 30, 2024

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The CONTRIBUTING.md file has been restructured and updated to enhance clarity regarding the contribution process for the Cosmos SDK. Key areas of focus include detailed sections on development procedures, testing, pull requests, accountability, and architectural decision-making processes. The document aims to streamline the contribution workflow and ensure adherence to project standards.

Changes

File Change Summary
CONTRIBUTING.md Restructured with expanded table of contents; updated sections on development, testing, pull requests, accountability, ADRs, RFCs, Go Modules, and Protocol Buffers tooling.

Possibly related PRs

  • chore(contributing): delete old file path #21838: The changes in this PR also involve updates to the CONTRIBUTING.md file, specifically related to the pull request templates, which aligns with the main PR's focus on restructuring and clarifying contribution guidelines.

Suggested reviewers

  • julienrbrt
  • tac0turtle

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
CONTRIBUTING.md (4)

Line range hint 39-89: Well-defined development procedure with emphasis on collaboration

The development procedure section provides clear guidelines for contributors, promoting best practices such as using Draft PRs and seeking early feedback. This approach can lead to more efficient collaboration and higher quality contributions.

Consider adding a brief explanation of how to create a Draft PR on GitHub, as some contributors might not be familiar with this feature.

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)


Line range hint 90-203: Comprehensive Pull Request Accountability guidelines

The new Pull Request Accountability section clearly defines responsibilities for both PR owners and reviewers. The detailed criteria for code quality, functionality, testing, documentation, and performance provide an excellent framework for ensuring high-quality contributions.

Consider adding a note about the importance of timely responses to review comments, both for PR owners and reviewers. This can help maintain momentum in the review process.

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)


Line range hint 244-303: Structured Concept & Feature Approval Process

The introduction of a structured Concept & Feature Approval Process, with clearly defined stages and time-bound periods for ADR reviews, is a significant improvement. This approach can help streamline feature development and decision-making processes.

Consider adding a brief explanation of how the community can participate in the RFC process for ADRs. This can encourage broader community involvement in the project's direction.

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)


203-203: Minor grammar improvement needed

The phrase "minor changes to docs changes" is grammatically awkward.

Consider revising this phrase for clarity. A suggested improvement:

- ...acceptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production code).
+ ...acceptable in the case of minor documentation changes that do not affect production code).
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between d493145 and fe61964.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • CONTRIBUTING.md (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
CONTRIBUTING.md (1)

Pattern **/*.md: "Assess the documentation for misspellings, grammatical errors, missing documentation and correctness"

🪛 LanguageTool
CONTRIBUTING.md

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)

🔇 Additional comments (2)
CONTRIBUTING.md (2)

Line range hint 1-38: Improved structure and clarity in the Table of Contents and Introduction

The expanded table of contents and revised introduction provide a more comprehensive overview of the contribution process. This change enhances the document's navigability and sets clear expectations for contributors.

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)


Line range hint 204-243: Clear and transparent Code Owner Membership process

The Code Owner Membership section provides a well-defined and transparent process for granting and revoking code owner privileges. The emphasis on the responsibility and trust associated with this role, along with clear criteria for removal, helps maintain the integrity of the project's governance.

🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool

[grammar] ~203-~203: Nouns are not usually modified by plural nouns. Is it possible that you meant to use the singular or possessive form here?
Context: ...eptable in the case of minor changes to docs changes that do not affect production c...

(PLURAL_MODIFIER)

@julienrbrt julienrbrt added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 1, 2024
Merged via the queue into cosmos:main with commit c44683d Oct 1, 2024
70 of 73 checks passed
alpe added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2024
* main:
  docs: amend docs for 52 changes  (#21992)
  test: migrate e2e/authz to system tests (#21819)
  refactor(runtime/v2): use StoreBuilder (#21989)
  feat(schema): add API descriptors, struct, oneof & list types, and wire encoding spec (#21482)
  docs: add instructions to change DefaultGenesis (#21680)
  feat(x/staking)!: Add metadata field to validator info (#21315)
  chore(x/authz)!: Remove account keeper dependency (#21632)
  chore(contributing): delete link (#21990)
  test(gov): Migrate e2e to system test (#21927)
  test: e2e/client to system tests (#21981)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants