That makes sense. I always interpreted that as telling possible
contributors that they can submit PRs as simple as typo fixes. I agree that
the website and MD file should be the same. Maybe a hyperlink is easiest.

Matteo

On Thu, Nov 6, 2025, 4:08 PM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks Alan, yes docs should reflect Contributing Guidelines 1:1 maybe
> a dedicated page for easier maintenance? :-)
>
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 10:00 PM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I think you and Matteo are right, the CONTRIBUTING.md makes it
> clean,
> > but the online Contributing Documentation doesn't:
> >
> > https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/documentation.html
> >
> > "Contributions to documentation are appreciated. These can be as simple
> as
> > fixing a typo or formatting issues to more involved changes such as
> > documenting parts of NuttX which are not yet covered or even writing
> guides
> > for other users."
> >
> > So, is it "appreciated or required" ? :-D
> >
> > I think "we have a problem", there is not a single point of truth, we
> have
> > information spread all over the places and conflicting.
> >
> > After voting, let's make the online Contributing Documentation reflecting
> > CONTRIBUTING.md and the definitions included here.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 5:47 PM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Alan we already have Documentation Requirements in the Contributing
> > > Guidelines [1]. What we are exactly voting for and what is the
> > > intended voting outcome / action?
> > > Tomek
> > >
> > > 1.8. Documentation requirements.
> > >
> > > Changes must come with a documentation update (where applicable).
> > >
> > > Documentation is part of the nuttx git repository. If code change is
> > > part of nuttx-apps repository then separate PR in nuttx repository is
> > > required. Otherwise documentation should come in the same PR as the
> > > code update.
> > >
> > > It is advised that the code and documentation should be split into two
> > > separate commits in the same PR. This helps backporting and separates
> > > possible code and documentation build errors. Squashing code together
> > > with documentation into a single commit should be avoided, but is
> > > acceptable.
> > >
> > > If change presents new functionality documentation must be provided in
> > > the same PR along with the code (not in the future).
> > >
> > > If change requires existing documentation update it must be contained
> > > in the same PR along with the code change (not in the future).
> > >
> > > Successful documentation build logs (shortcut) are welcome.
> > >
> > > This helps us keep documentation in sync with the code.
> > >
> > > See:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/tree/master/Documentation
> > > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/INVIOLABLES.md
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#18-documentation-requirements
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 8:59 PM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As discussed in [1] we need to improve our Documentation and
> requesting
> > > > Documentation from the author of the new added Features seems to be
> the
> > > > best approach.
> > > >
> > > > So these are the proposals to be voted:
> > > >
> > > > - Anyone submitting a new features should write Documentation to it,
> > > which
> > > > he/she is the author is knows more about that features than other
> people
> > > > and could write better Documentation;
> > > >
> > > > - Anyone adding a new function (or a new resource such as ioctl, etc)
> > > > should include it in the existing Documentation; If there is not
> > > > Documentation for that Feature/Driver/whatever, then the Reviews
> should
> > > > suggest the contributor to submit a basic page (without forcing him
> to do
> > > > it)
> > > >
> > > > I think these are the key points collected from the previous
> discussion.
> > > >
> > > > BR,
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > 1 - https://lists.apache.org/thread/5dklb9r2k9vpl9jwpromdn0lcv3h0985
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
>

Reply via email to