diff options
author | Laurence Urhegyi <laurence.urhegyi@codethink.co.uk> | 2019-06-24 17:53:56 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Laurence Urhegyi <laurence.urhegyi@codethink.co.uk> | 2019-06-24 17:53:56 +0000 |
commit | d9cc0ba6c831d4f35e4c449d472c54ba3840c628 (patch) | |
tree | c19022dd2577dee509ac548b401d1d7f183ee721 | |
parent | 8a3676affba3530766cea2a37f9c59998afd3a9a (diff) | |
download | buildstream-d9cc0ba6c831d4f35e4c449d472c54ba3840c628.tar.gz |
Update CONTRIBUTING.rst
adds some guidelines on how committers are chosen and granted access
-rw-r--r-- | CONTRIBUTING.rst | 42 |
1 files changed, 42 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.rst b/CONTRIBUTING.rst index b128c7f9b..40b8db5a1 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.rst +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.rst @@ -199,6 +199,48 @@ separately. This is a part of #123 +Committer access +---------------- + +Committers in the BuildStream project are those folks to whom the right to +directly commit changes to our version controlled resources has been granted. +While every contribution is +valued regardless of its source, not every person who contributes code to the +project will earn commit access. The `COMMITTERS`_ file lists all committers. + +.. _COMMITTERS: https://gitlab.com/BuildStream/buildstream/blob/master/COMMITTERS.rst + + +How commit access is granted +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +After someone has successfully contributed a few non-trivial patches, some full +committer, usually whoever has reviewed and applied the most patches from that +contributor, proposes them for commit access. This proposal is sent only to the +other full committers -- the ensuing discussion is private, so that everyone can +feel comfortable speaking their minds. Assuming there are no objections, the +contributor is granted commit access. The decision is made by consensus; there +are no formal rules governing the procedure, though generally if someone strongly +objects the access is not offered, or is offered on a provisional basis. + +This of course relies on contributors being responsive and showing willingness +to address any problems that may arise after landing patches. However, the primary +criterion for commit access is good judgment. + +You do not have to be a technical wizard, or demonstrate deep knowledge of the +entire codebase to become a committer. You just need to know what you don't +know. If your patches adhere to the guidelines in this file, adhere to all the usual +unquantifiable rules of coding (code should be readable, robust, maintainable, etc.), +and respect the Hippocratic Principle of "first, do no harm", then you will probably +get commit access pretty quickly. The size, complexity, and quantity of your patches +do not matter as much as the degree of care you show in avoiding bugs and minimizing +unnecessary impact on the rest of the code. Many full committers are people who have +not made major code contributions, but rather lots of small, clean fixes, each of +which was an unambiguous improvement to the code. (Of course, this does not mean the +project needs a bunch of very trivial patches whose only purpose is to gain commit +access; knowing what's worth a patch post and what's not is part of showing good +judgement.) + Coding guidelines ----------------- |