Add a Getting Started in CONTRIBUTING.md #745
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #745 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 91.38% 91.37% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 37 37
Lines 22067 22067
==========================================
- Hits 20165 20164 -1
- Misses 1902 1903 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Thanks @moneyball for the fixes, took them directly on my commit with credits. |
jkczyz
left a comment
jkczyz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall, looks good! Just some minor nits.
CONTRIBUTING.md
Outdated
| development compared to your merged work. | ||
|
|
||
| Even if you have an extensive open source background or sound software engineering skills, consider | ||
| that comprehension by the other set of regular contributors is as much important than its technical |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's ambiguous as to what "its" is referring to. Should it say is?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Corrected, added code before comprehension.
CONTRIBUTING.md
Outdated
| development compared to your merged work. | ||
|
|
||
| Even if you have an extensive open source background or sound software engineering skills, consider | ||
| that comprehension by the other set of regular contributors is as much important than its technical |
CONTRIBUTING.md
Outdated
| correctness. | ||
|
|
||
| It's very welcome to ask for review, either on IRC or LDK Slack. And also for reviewers, it's nice | ||
| to provide timelines when you hope to fulfill the request while bearing in mind for both side that's |
|
Thanks for review, updated at 039ffee. |
CONTRIBUTING.md
Outdated
| development compared to your merged work. | ||
|
|
||
| Even if you have an extensive open source background or sound software engineering skills, consider | ||
| that code comprehension by the other set of regular contributors is as much important as its |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would recommend rephrasing "the other set of regular contributors" simply as "the reviewers". Tightening it up makes the connection between "comprehension" and "technical correctness" more apparent without loss of meaning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry about nit picking this to death. After reading the new version, I think the following wording would be clearer:
that the reviewers' comprehension of the code is as much important as technical correctness.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a minute update, that's fine :)
Fix by Steve Lee <[email protected]>
3 participants
Our current protocol dev onboarding is a work-in-progress, having a least an explicit "Getting Started" is really needed at its this phase of the project.