On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:54:57 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I think that "Contributing to the OpenJFX codebase" should be renamed to >> something related to a style guide. Then split >> the testing part to its own subsection. >> Also, I still find it confusing that "New features / API additions" is not >> under the code contribution section. There >> seems to be 2 main sections: reporting bugs / requesting features - these >> don't involve code, just talk; then there is >> contributing code, which covers the process for setup, submissions of bugs >> fixes, submission of features/API, style, >> and testing (in some order). Wouldn't this be a better flow? > > Yes, I do think the flow could be better. I'll need to put this on hold for a > while, but when I get back to it, I'll > look at your suggestions and see if I can come up with something that will > improve the flow. > Btw, the thinking behind putting the "New features / API additions" sections > at the end (sort of like an appendix) is > that I didn't want it to get in the way of the "here's how you sumbit and > review a PR" for bug fixes, which is the more > common case. I don't think it achieves that in its current form. not sure whether it belongs here, or whether or not it's obviously implied but: I would like to see a bit of clarification on testing of contributions. Right now the sentence might be interpreted to be about running available tests: > Test your changes > Run the test suite to make sure that nothing is broken. > add something like: - For most code changes, new tests covering those changes are mandatory. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/303
