1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325
|
.. _contributing:
Contributing to Simple Bandwidth Scanner
=========================================
Thank you for your interest in Simple Bandwidth Scanner (``sbws``).
Examples of contributions include:
* Bug reports, feature requests
* Code/documentation patches
Bug reports or feature requests
---------------------------------
* Check that it has not been already reported.
.. _ticket-ref:
* Open a issue in
`Tor Project Gitlab <https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/sbws/-/issues>`_ .
Code/documentation patches
---------------------------
The sbws canonical repository is
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/sbws.
To know more about ``sbws`` code,
.. seealso::
- :ref:`dev_doc`
- ``./docs/source/testing.rst`` (or `testing </docs/source/testing.rst>`_
or :ref:`testing`).
- ``./docs/source/documenting.rst`` (or `documenting </docs/source/documenting.rst>`_
or :ref:`documenting`).
The following are guidelines we aim to follow.
Steps to create a MR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Create a issue in Tor Project Gitlab (:ref:`Open issue <ticket-ref>`)
2. Fork ``sbws`` via the Gitlab web interface:
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/sbws
3. Clone the repository locally
4. Install ``sbws`` as explained in ./INSTALL.rst and ./TESTING.rst
Use ``pip install -e <>``
5. If needed install the documentation and build it as explained in
./DOCUMENTATION.rst
6. Create a new feature branch.
If the issue solves a bug, base the branch on the latest maintained version,
eg. ``maint-1.1`` and name it with the name of the base branch plus
``_bugXXX``, where `XXX` is the number of the issue.
If the issue is a new feature, base the branch on the `master` branch and
name it ``ticketXXX``.
Optionally, the last part of the branch name can be any string, eg.
``maint-1.1_bugXXX_contributing``.
7. Write code (:ref:`codestyle-ref`), tests, documentation,
extra files (:ref:`extrafiles-ref`), commit (:ref:`commits-ref`), etc.
8. Ensure tests pass (./TESTING.rst).
9. Push your branch to your Gitlab repository.
10. Ensure the CI tests are passing
(https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/sbws/-/pipelines)
Finally:
11. Create a MR from your branch at
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/sbws
.. _codestyle-ref:
Code style
~~~~~~~~~~
Follow the Zen of Python (:pep:`20`)
.. code-block:: pycon
>>> import this
The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters
Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Code should adhere to the :pep:`8` guidelines.
Before release 1.0.0, some guidelines have not been followed,
such as the ordering the inputs (:pep:`8#imports`).
External link: `Code Style <https://docs.python-guide.org/writing/style/>`_
All functions, methods and classes should have :pep:`0257`
(except ``__repr__`` and ``__str__``).
Before release 1.0.0, some docstrigs do not have 3 double quotes ``"""``
(:pep:`0257#what-is-a-docstring`).
External link: `Documentation <https://docs.python-guide.org/writing/documentation/>`_
New features should add a corresponding documentation in /docs.
An editor compatible with `EditorConfig <https://editorconfig.org/>`_ will
help you to follow the general formatting code style.
Timestamps must be in UTC. It is preferred to use ``datetime`` objects or
Unix timestamps. Timestamps read by the user should be always formatted in
`ISO 8601 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601>`_
Functional style is preferred:
- use list comprenhensions lambda, map, reduce
- avoid reasigigning variables, instead create new ones
- use ``deepcopy`` when passing list of objects to a function/method
- classes should change attributes only in one method (other than __init__?)
[FUNC]_
In general, do not reinvent the wheel, use Python native modules as ``logging``,
instead of implementing similar functionality.
Or use other packages when the new dependency can be extra, for instance
`vulture`_.
.. _`extrafiles-ref`:
Extra required files
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Any non-trivial change should contain tests. See ./TESTING.rst.
When running tests, currently ``flake8`` informs on some PEP8 errors/warnings,
but not all.
.. _commits-ref:
Commits
~~~~~~~~~
Each commit should reference the Tor Project Gitlab issue (example: ``#12345``)
and possibly the bugfix version.
The commit message should contain ``Closes: #bugnumber``.
From version 1.0.2 we started to prefix the summary with the subpackage or
component, though we have not standardized the words to use, eg: ``scanner``,
``generate``, ``v3bwfile``, ``relaylist``, ``doc``, ``test``, ``CI``.
From version 1.0.3, we also started to prefix the summary with ``new``,
``fix`` or ``chg``, so that `gitchangelog`_ automatically generates different
sections in the CHANGELOG.
From version 1.1.0 we started to use the words ``new``, ``chg`` and ``fix``,
not in the sense `gitchangelog`_ use them, but to match semantic versioning
changes major, minor and patch.
Try to make each commit a logically separate changes.::
As a general rule, your messages should start with a single line that’s
o more than about 50 characters and that describes the changeset concisely,
followed by a blank line, followed by a more detailed explanation.
The Git project requires that the more detailed explanation include
your motivation for the change and contrast its implementation with
previous behavior — this is a good guideline to follow.
It’s also a good idea to use the imperative present tense in these messages.
In other words, use commands.
Instead of "I added tests for" or "Adding tests for," use "Add tests for."
[DIST]_
Template originally written by `Tim Pope`_: :ref:`example commit <commit-msg>`
Code being reviewed workflow
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When a MR is being reviewed, new changes might be needed:
- If the change does not modify a previous change, create new commits and push.
- If the change modifies a previous change and it's small,
`git commit fixup <https://git-scm.com/docs/git-commit#Documentation/git-commit.txt---fixupamendrewordltcommitgt>`_
should be used. When it is agreed that the MR is ready, create a new branch
named ``mybranch_02`` and run:
.. code-block:: bash
rebase --autosquash
push, create new MR and close old MR mentioning the number of the new MR.
- If the review takes long and when it's ready code related to the MR has changed
in master, create a new branch named ``mybranch_02`` and run:
.. code-block:: bash
rebase master
push, create new MR and close old MR mentioning the number of the new MR.
[MERG]_
.. _review-ref:
Reviewing code
----------------
All code should be peer-reviewed. Two reasons for this are::
Because a developer cannot think of everything at once;
Because a fresh pair of eyes may spot an error, a corner-case in the code,
insufficient documentation, a missing consistency check, etc.
[REVI]_
Reviewers:
- Should let the contributor know what to improve/change.
- Should not push code to the contributor's branch.
- Should wait for contributor's changes or feedback after changes are requested,
before merging or closing a MR.
- Should merge (not rebase) the MR.
- If rebase is needed due to changes in master, the contributor should create
a new branch named `xxx_rebased` based on the reviewed branch, rebase and
create a new MR from it, as explained above.
- If new changes are needed when the contributor's branch is ready to merge,
the reviewer can create a new branch based on the contributor's branch,
push the changes and merge that MR.
The contributor should be notified about it.
- If the reviewer realize that new changes are needed after the MR has been
merged, the reviewer can push to master, notifying the contributor about the
changes.
- Because currently there are not many reviewers, reviewers can merge their own
MR if there was not any feedback after a week.
- Should not push directly to master, unless changes are trivial (typos,
extra spaces, etc.)
- Should not push to master new features while there are open MRs to review.
Currently, the reviewers are `gk <https://gitlab.torproject.org/gk>`_,
`ahf <https://gitlab.torproject.org/ahf>`_,
`juga <https://gitlab.torproject.org/juga>`_.
.. _releases-ref:
Releases
----------
Releases follow `semantic versioning`_.
Until release 1.0.0 is reached, this project is not considered production
ready.
Currently development happens in master, this might change from release 1.0.0
so that master has the last release changes, and development happens in the
next release branch.
Before major releases, ensure that:
- Installation from scratch, as specified in ./INSTALL.md, must success.
- All tests must pass.
- Tor must be able to parse the produced bw files
(current way is manual)
.. todo::
Test that run Tor as dirauth and parse the files
- Bandwidth files must produce graphs compatible with Torflow
(current way to test it is manual)
.. todo::
Implement something to compare error with current consensus.
- A dirauth should be able to understand the documentation, otherwise the
documentation should be clarified.
.. _changelog:
Create a ./CHANGELOG.rst file.
Each entry should reference the Tor Project Gitlab issue (example: ``#12345``)
and possibly the bugfix version.
Until version 1.0.2 we have followed `keep a changelog`_ format.
From version 1.1.x, run ``./scripts/maint/release.py`` to create new releases.
It uses `gitchangelog`_ to automatically add new CHANGELOG entries from the
commits' messages.
.. _commit-msg:
Example commit message
-----------------------
::
Short (50 chars or less) summary of changes
More detailed explanatory text, if necessary. Wrap it to
about 72 characters or so. In some contexts, the first
line is treated as the subject of an email and the rest of
the text as the body. The blank line separating the
summary from the body is critical (unless you omit the body
entirely); tools like rebase can get confused if you run
the two together.
Further paragraphs come after blank lines.
- Bullet points are okay, too
- Typically a hyphen or asterisk is used for the bullet,
preceded by a single space, with blank lines in
between, but conventions vary here
.. rubric:: External references
.. [DIST] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Contributing-to-a-Project
.. [MERG] https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing
.. [REVI] https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/review.html#reviewing-and-closing-prs
.. [FUNC] https://docs.python.org/3/howto/functional.html
.. _tim pope: https://tbaggery.com/2008/04/19/a-note-about-git-commit-messages.html
.. _`keep a changelog`: https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.0.0/
.. _`semantic versioning`: https://semver.org/
.. _`vulture`: https://pypi.org/project/vulture/
.. _`gitchangelog`: https://github.com/vaab/gitchangelog
|