<!-- END doctoc generated TOC please keep comment here to allow auto update -->
<!-- END doctoc generated TOC please keep comment here to allow auto update -->
---
---
## Contributing Documentation has been moved
As of July 2018, all the documentation for contributing to the GitLab project has been moved to a new location.
[view the new documentation](doc/development/contributing/index.md) to find the latest information.
## Contribute to GitLab
## Contribute to GitLab
For a first-time step-by-step guide to the contribution process, see
For a first-time step-by-step guide to the contribution process, see
...
@@ -84,6 +90,36 @@ Please report suspected security vulnerabilities in private to
...
@@ -84,6 +90,36 @@ Please report suspected security vulnerabilities in private to
Please do **NOT** create publicly viewable issues for suspected security
Please do **NOT** create publicly viewable issues for suspected security
vulnerabilities.
vulnerabilities.
## Code of conduct
As contributors and maintainers of this project, we pledge to respect all
people who contribute through reporting issues, posting feature requests,
updating documentation, submitting pull requests or patches, and other
activities.
We are committed to making participation in this project a harassment-free
experience for everyone, regardless of level of experience, gender, gender
identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance,
body size, race, ethnicity, age, or religion.
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include the use of sexual
language or imagery, derogatory comments or personal attacks, trolling, public
or private harassment, insults, or other unprofessional conduct.
Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions
that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct. Project maintainers who do not
follow the Code of Conduct may be removed from the project team.
This code of conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces
when an individual is representing the project or its community.
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior can be
reported by emailing `contact@gitlab.com`.
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the [Contributor Covenant][contributor-covenant], version 1.1.0,
available at [http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/](http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/).
## Closing policy for issues and merge requests
## Closing policy for issues and merge requests
GitLab is a popular open source project and the capacity to deal with issues
GitLab is a popular open source project and the capacity to deal with issues
...
@@ -123,669 +159,164 @@ learn how to communicate with GitLab. If you're looking for a Gitter or Slack ch
...
@@ -123,669 +159,164 @@ learn how to communicate with GitLab. If you're looking for a Gitter or Slack ch
please consider we favor
please consider we favor
[asynchronous communication](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/communication/#internal-communication) over real time communication. Thanks for your contribution!
[asynchronous communication](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/communication/#internal-communication) over real time communication. Thanks for your contribution!
## Workflow labels
## Contribution Flow
To allow for asynchronous issue handling, we use [milestones][milestones-page]
and [labels][labels-page]. Leads and product managers handle most of the
scheduling into milestones. Labelling is a task for everyone.
Most issues will have labels for at least one of the following:
- Type: ~"feature proposal", ~bug, ~customer, etc.
When contributing to GitLab, your merge request is subject to review by merge request maintainers of a particular specialty.
- Subject: ~wiki, ~"container registry", ~ldap, ~api, ~frontend, etc.
All labels, their meaning and priority are defined on the
When you submit code to GitLab, we really want it to get merged, but there will be times when it will not be merged.
[labels page][labels-page].
If you come across an issue that has none of these, and you're allowed to set
When maintainers are reading through a merge request they may request guidance from other maintainers. If merge request maintainers conclude that the code should not be merged, our reasons will be fully disclosed. If it has been decided that the code quality is not up to GitLab’s standards, the merge request maintainer will refer the author to our docs and code style guides, and provide some guidance.
labels, you can _always_ add the team and type, and often also the subject.
Sometimes style guides will be followed but the code will lack structural integrity, or the maintainer will have reservations about the code’s overall quality. When there is a reservation the maintainer will inform the author and provide some guidance. The author may then choose to update the merge request. Once the merge request has been updated and reassigned to the maintainer, they will review the code again. Once the code has been resubmitted any number of times, the maintainer may choose to close the merge request with a summary of why it will not be merged, as well as some guidance. If the merge request is closed the maintainer will be open to discussion as to how to improve the code so it can be approved in the future.
GitLab will do its best to review community contributions as quickly as possible. Specially appointed developers review community contributions daily. You may take a look at the [team page](https://about.gitlab.com/team/) for the merge request coach who specializes in the type of code you have written and mention them in the merge request. For example, if you have written some JavaScript in your code then you should mention the frontend merge request coach. If your code has multiple disciplines you may mention multiple merge request coaches.
Type labels are very important. They define what kind of issue this is. Every
GitLab receives a lot of community contributions, so if your code has not been reviewed within 4 days of its initial submission feel free to re-mention the appropriate merge request coach.
issue should have one or more.
Examples of type labels are ~"feature proposal", ~bug, ~customer, ~security,
When submitting code to GitLab, you may feel that your contribution requires the aid of an external library. If your code includes an external library please provide a link to the library, as well as reasons for including it.
and ~"direction".
A number of type labels have a priority assigned to them, which automatically
When your code contains more than 500 changes, any major breaking changes, or an external library, `@mention` a maintainer in the merge request. If you are not sure who to mention, the reviewer will add one early in the merge request process.
makes them float to the top, depending on their importance.
Type labels are always lowercase, and can have any color, besides blue (which is
| ~S1 | Blocker | Outage, broken feature with no workaround | Unable to create an issue. Data corruption/loss. Security breach. |
| ~S2 | Critical Severity | Broken Feature, workaround too complex & unacceptable | Can push commits, but only via the command line. |
| ~S3 | Major Severity | Broken Feature, workaround acceptable | Can create merge requests only from the Merge Requests page, not through the Issue. |
| ~S4 | Low Severity | Functionality inconvenience or cosmetic issue | Label colors are incorrect / not being displayed. |
#### Severity impact guidance
#### Severity impact guidance
Severity levels can be applied further depending on the facet of the impact; e.g. Affected customers, GitLab.com availability, performance and etc. The below is a guideline.
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
| ~S1 | >50% users affected (possible company extinction level event) | Significant impact on all of GitLab.com | |
| ~S2 | Many users or multiple paid customers affected (but not apocalyptic)| Significant impact on large portions of GitLab.com | Degradation is guaranteed to occur in the near future |
| ~S3 | A few users or a single paid customer affected | Limited impact on important portions of GitLab.com | Degradation is likely to occur in the near future |
| ~S4 | No paid users/customer affected, or expected to in the near future | Minor impact on on GitLab.com | Degradation _may_ occur but it's not likely |
### Label for community contributors
### Label for community contributors
Issues that are beneficial to our users, 'nice to haves', that we currently do
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
not have the capacity for or want to give the priority to, are labeled as
~"Accepting Merge Requests", so the community can make a contribution.
Community contributors can submit merge requests for any issue they want, but
the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label has a special meaning. It points to
changes that:
1. We already agreed on,
1. Are well-defined,
1. Are likely to get accepted by a maintainer.
We want to avoid a situation when a contributor picks an
~"Accepting Merge Requests" issue and then their merge request gets closed,
because we realize that it does not fit our vision, or we want to solve it in a
different way.
We add the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label to:
- Low priority ~bug issues (i.e. we do not add it to the bugs that we want to
solve in the ~"Next Patch Release")
- Small ~"feature proposal"
- Small ~"technical debt" issues
After adding the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label, we try to estimate the
[weight](#issue-weight) of the issue. We use issue weight to let contributors
know how difficult the issue is. Additionally:
- We advertise ["Accepting Merge Requests" issues with weight < 5][up-for-grabs]
as suitable for people that have never contributed to GitLab before on the
[Up For Grabs campaign](http://up-for-grabs.net)
- We encourage people that have never contributed to any open source project to
look for ["Accepting Merge Requests" issues with a weight of 1][firt-timers]
If you've decided that you would like to work on an issue, please @-mention
the [appropriate product manager](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/#who-to-talk-to-for-what)
as soon as possible. The product manager will then pull in appropriate GitLab team
members to further discuss scope, design, and technical considerations. This will
ensure that that your contribution is aligned with the GitLab product and minimize
any rework and delay in getting it merged into master.
GitLab team members who apply the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label to an issue
should update the issue description with a responsible product manager, inviting
any potential community contributor to @-mention per above.
For guidance on UX implementation at GitLab, please refer to our [Design System](https://design.gitlab.com/).
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/design.md) has been moved.
The UX team uses labels to manage their workflow.
The ~"UX" label on an issue is a signal to the UX team that it will need UX attention.
To better understand the priority by which UX tackles issues, see the [UX section](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/ux) of the handbook.
Once an issue has been worked on and is ready for development, a UXer removes the ~"UX" label and applies the ~"UX ready" label to that issue.
The UX team has a special type label called ~"design artifact". This label indicates that the final output
for an issue is a UX solution/design. The solution will be developed by frontend and/or backend in a subsequent milestone.
Any issue labeled ~"design artifact" should not also be labeled ~"frontend" or ~"backend" since no development is
needed until the solution has been decided.
~"design artifact" issues are like any other issue and should contain a milestone label, ~"Deliverable" or ~"Stretch", when scheduled in the current milestone.
To prevent the misunderstanding that a feature will be be delivered in the
assigned milestone, when only UX design is planned for that milestone, the
Product Manager should create a separate issue for the ~"design artifact",
assign the ~UX, ~"design artifact" and ~"Deliverable" labels, add a milestone
and use a title that makes it clear that the scheduled issue is design only
(e.g. `Design exploration for XYZ`).
When the ~"design artifact" issue has been completed, the UXer removes the ~UX
label, adds the ~"UX ready" label and closes the issue. This indicates the
design artifact is complete. The UXer will also copy the designs to related
issues for implementation in an upcoming milestone.
## Issue tracker
## Issue tracker
To get support for your particular problem please use the
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
[getting help channels](https://about.gitlab.com/getting-help/).
The [GitLab CE issue tracker on GitLab.com][ce-tracker] is for bugs concerning
the latest GitLab release and [feature proposals](#feature-proposals).
When submitting an issue please conform to the issue submission guidelines
listed below. Not all issues will be addressed and your issue is more likely to
be addressed if you submit a merge request which partially or fully solves
the issue.
If you're unsure where to post, post to the [mailing list][google-group] or
[Stack Overflow][stackoverflow] first. There are a lot of helpful GitLab users
there who may be able to help you quickly. If your particular issue turns out
to be a bug, it will find its way from there.
If it happens that you know the solution to an existing bug, please first
open the issue in order to keep track of it and then open the relevant merge
request that potentially fixes it.
### Issue triaging
### Issue triaging
Our issue triage policies are [described in our handbook]. You are very welcome
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
to help the GitLab team triage issues. We also organize [issue bash events] once
every quarter.
The most important thing is making sure valid issues receive feedback from the
development team. Therefore the priority is mentioning developers that can help
on those issues. Please select someone with relevant experience from the
[GitLab team][team]. If there is nobody mentioned with that expertise look in
the commit history for the affected files to find someone.
We also use [GitLab Triage] to automate some triaging policies. This is
currently setup as a [scheduled pipeline] running on [quality/triage-ops]
project.
[described in our handbook]:https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/issue-triage/
To create a feature proposal for CE, open an issue on the
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
[issue tracker of CE][ce-tracker].
For feature proposals for EE, open an issue on the
[issue tracker of EE][ee-tracker].
In order to help track the feature proposals, we have created a
[`feature proposal`][fpl] label. For the time being, users that are not members
of the project cannot add labels. You can instead ask one of the [core team]
members to add the label ~"feature proposal" to the issue or add the following
code snippet right after your description in a new line: `~"feature proposal"`.
Please keep feature proposals as small and simple as possible, complex ones
might be edited to make them small and simple.
Please submit Feature Proposals using the ['Feature Proposal' issue template](.gitlab/issue_templates/Feature Proposal.md) provided on the issue tracker.
For changes in the interface, it is helpful to include a mockup. Issues that add to, or change, the interface should
be given the ~"UX" label. This will allow the UX team to provide input and guidance. You may
need to ask one of the [core team] members to add the label, if you do not have permissions to do it by yourself.
If you want to create something yourself, consider opening an issue first to
discuss whether it is interesting to include this in GitLab.
### Issue tracker guidelines
### Issue tracker guidelines
**[Search the issue tracker][ce-tracker]** for similar entries before
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
submitting your own, there's a good chance somebody else had the same issue or
feature proposal. Show your support with an award emoji and/or join the
discussion.
Please submit bugs using the ['Bug' issue template](.gitlab/issue_templates/Bug.md) provided on the issue tracker.
The text in the parenthesis is there to help you with what to include. Omit it
when submitting the actual issue. You can copy-paste it and then edit as you
see fit.
### Issue weight
### Issue weight
Issue weight allows us to get an idea of the amount of work required to solve
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
one or multiple issues. This makes it possible to schedule work more accurately.
You are encouraged to set the weight of any issue. Following the guidelines
below will make it easy to manage this, without unnecessary overhead.
1. Set weight for any issue at the earliest possible convenience
1. If you don't agree with a set weight, discuss with other developers until
consensus is reached about the weight
1. Issue weights are an abstract measurement of complexity of the issue. Do not
relate issue weight directly to time. This is called [anchoring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring)
and something you want to avoid.
1. Something that has a weight of 1 (or no weight) is really small and simple.
Something that is 9 is rewriting a large fundamental part of GitLab,
which might lead to many hard problems to solve. Changing some text in GitLab
is probably 1, adding a new Git Hook maybe 4 or 5, big features 7-9.
1. If something is very large, it should probably be split up in multiple
issues or chunks. You can simply not set the weight of a parent issue and set
weights to children issues.
### Regression issues
Every monthly release has a corresponding issue on the CE issue tracker to keep
track of functionality broken by that release and any fixes that need to be
included in a patch release (see [8.3 Regressions] as an example).
As outlined in the issue description, the intended workflow is to post one note
### Regression issues
with a reference to an issue describing the regression, and then to update that
note with a reference to the merge request that fixes it as it becomes available.
If you're a contributor who doesn't have the required permissions to update
other users' notes, please post a new note with a reference to both the issue
and the merge request.
The release manager will [update the notes] in the regression issue as fixes are
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md) has been moved.
1. For tests that use Capybara or PhantomJS, see this [article on how
to write reliable asynchronous tests](https://robots.thoughtbot.com/write-reliable-asynchronous-integration-tests-with-capybara).
Please keep the change in a single MR **as small as possible**. If you want to
contribute a large feature think very hard what the minimum viable change is.
Can you split the functionality? Can you only submit the backend/API code? Can
you start with a very simple UI? Can you do part of the refactor? The increased
reviewability of small MRs that leads to higher code quality is more important
to us than having a minimal commit log. The smaller an MR is the more likely it
is it will be merged (quickly). After that you can send more MRs to enhance it.
The ['How to get faster PR reviews' document of Kubernetes](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/faster_reviews.md) also has some great points regarding this.
For examples of feedback on merge requests please look at already
[closed merge requests][closed-merge-requests]. If you would like quick feedback
on your merge request feel free to mention someone from the [core team] or one
of the [Merge request coaches][team].
Please ensure that your merge request meets the contribution acceptance criteria.
When having your code reviewed and when reviewing merge requests please take the
[code review guidelines](doc/development/code_review.md) into account.
### Contribution acceptance criteria
1. The change is as small as possible
1. Include proper tests and make all tests pass (unless it contains a test
exposing a bug in existing code). Every new class should have corresponding
unit tests, even if the class is exercised at a higher level, such as a feature test.
1. If you suspect a failing CI build is unrelated to your contribution, you may
try and restart the failing CI job or ask a developer to fix the
aforementioned failing test
1. Your MR initially contains a single commit (please use `git rebase -i` to
squash commits)
1. Your changes can merge without problems (if not please rebase if you're the
only one working on your feature branch, otherwise, merge `master`)
1. Does not break any existing functionality
1. Fixes one specific issue or implements one specific feature (do not combine
things, send separate merge requests if needed)
1. Migrations should do only one thing (e.g., either create a table, move data
to a new table or remove an old table) to aid retrying on failure
1. Keeps the GitLab code base clean and well structured
1. Contains functionality we think other users will benefit from too
1. Doesn't add configuration options or settings options since they complicate
making and testing future changes
1. Changes do not adversely degrade performance.
- Avoid repeated polling of endpoints that require a significant amount of overhead
- Check for N+1 queries via the SQL log or [`QueryRecorder`](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- Avoid repeated access of filesystem
1. If you need polling to support real-time features, please use
[polling with ETag caching][polling-etag].
1. Changes after submitting the merge request should be in separate commits
(no squashing).
1. It conforms to the [style guides](#style-guides) and the following:
- If your change touches a line that does not follow the style, modify the
entire line to follow it. This prevents linting tools from generating warnings.
- Don't touch neighbouring lines. As an exception, automatic mass
refactoring modifications may leave style non-compliant.
1. If the merge request adds any new libraries (gems, JavaScript libraries,
etc.), they should conform to our [Licensing guidelines][license-finder-doc].
See the instructions in that document for help if your MR fails the
"license-finder" test with a "Dependencies that need approval" error.
1. The merge request meets the [definition of done](#definition-of-done).
## Definition of done
If you contribute to GitLab please know that changes involve more than just
code. We have the following [definition of done][definition-of-done]. Please ensure you support
the feature you contribute through all of these steps.
1. Description explaining the relevancy (see following item)
1. Working and clean code that is commented where needed
1.[Unit, integration, and system tests][testing] that pass on the CI server
1. Performance/scalability implications have been considered, addressed, and tested
1.[Documented][doc-guidelines] in the `/doc` directory
1.[Changelog entry added][changelog], if necessary
1. Reviewed and any concerns are addressed
1. Merged by a project maintainer
1. Added to the release blog article, if relevant
1. Added to [the website](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/), if relevant
1. Community questions answered
1. Answers to questions radiated (in docs/wiki/support etc.)
If you add a dependency in GitLab (such as an operating system package) please
consider updating the following and note the applicability of each in your
merge request:
1. Note the addition in the release blog post (create one if it doesn't exist yet) https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/
1. Upgrade guide, for example https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/update/7.5-to-7.6.md
1. Interface text should be written subjectively instead of objectively. It
should be the GitLab core team addressing a person. It should be written in
present time and never use past tense (has been/was). For example instead
of _prohibited this user from being saved due to the following errors:_ the
text should be _sorry, we could not create your account because:_
1. Code should be written in [US English][us-english]
This is also the style used by linting tools such as
[RuboCop](https://github.com/bbatsov/rubocop),
[PullReview](https://www.pullreview.com/) and [Hound CI](https://houndci.com).
## Code of conduct
As contributors and maintainers of this project, we pledge to respect all
people who contribute through reporting issues, posting feature requests,
updating documentation, submitting pull requests or patches, and other
activities.
We are committed to making participation in this project a harassment-free
experience for everyone, regardless of level of experience, gender, gender
identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance,
body size, race, ethnicity, age, or religion.
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include the use of sexual
language or imagery, derogatory comments or personal attacks, trolling, public
or private harassment, insults, or other unprofessional conduct.
Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions
that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct. Project maintainers who do not
follow the Code of Conduct may be removed from the project team.
This code of conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces
when an individual is representing the project or its community.
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior can be
reported by emailing `contact@gitlab.com`.
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the [Contributor Covenant][contributor-covenant], version 1.1.0,
available at [http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/](http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/).
## Contribution Flow
When contributing to GitLab, your merge request is subject to review by merge request maintainers of a particular specialty.
When you submit code to GitLab, we really want it to get merged, but there will be times when it will not be merged.
When maintainers are reading through a merge request they may request guidance from other maintainers. If merge request maintainers conclude that the code should not be merged, our reasons will be fully disclosed. If it has been decided that the code quality is not up to GitLab’s standards, the merge request maintainer will refer the author to our docs and code style guides, and provide some guidance.
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/merge_request_workflow.md) has been moved.
Sometimes style guides will be followed but the code will lack structural integrity, or the maintainer will have reservations about the code’s overall quality. When there is a reservation the maintainer will inform the author and provide some guidance. The author may then choose to update the merge request. Once the merge request has been updated and reassigned to the maintainer, they will review the code again. Once the code has been resubmitted any number of times, the maintainer may choose to close the merge request with a summary of why it will not be merged, as well as some guidance. If the merge request is closed the maintainer will be open to discussion as to how to improve the code so it can be approved in the future.
GitLab will do its best to review community contributions as quickly as possible. Specially appointed developers review community contributions daily. You may take a look at the [team page](https://about.gitlab.com/team/) for the merge request coach who specializes in the type of code you have written and mention them in the merge request. For example, if you have written some JavaScript in your code then you should mention the frontend merge request coach. If your code has multiple disciplines you may mention multiple merge request coaches.
## Definition of done
GitLab receives a lot of community contributions, so if your code has not been reviewed within 4 days of its initial submission feel free to re-mention the appropriate merge request coach.
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/merge_request_workflow.md)) has been moved.
When submitting code to GitLab, you may feel that your contribution requires the aid of an external library. If your code includes an external library please provide a link to the library, as well as reasons for including it.
When your code contains more than 500 changes, any major breaking changes, or an external library, `@mention` a maintainer in the merge request. If you are not sure who to mention, the reviewer will add one early in the merge request process.
## Style guides
[core team]:https://about.gitlab.com/core-team/
This [documentation](doc/development/contributing/design.md) has been moved.
<!-- END doctoc generated TOC please keep comment here to allow auto update -->
## Implement design & UI elements
For guidance on UX implementation at GitLab, please refer to our [Design System](https://design.gitlab.com/).
The UX team uses labels to manage their workflow.
The ~"UX" label on an issue is a signal to the UX team that it will need UX attention.
To better understand the priority by which UX tackles issues, see the [UX section](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/ux) of the handbook.
Once an issue has been worked on and is ready for development, a UXer removes the ~"UX" label and applies the ~"UX ready" label to that issue.
The UX team has a special type label called ~"design artifact". This label indicates that the final output
for an issue is a UX solution/design. The solution will be developed by frontend and/or backend in a subsequent milestone.
Any issue labeled ~"design artifact" should not also be labeled ~"frontend" or ~"backend" since no development is
needed until the solution has been decided.
~"design artifact" issues are like any other issue and should contain a milestone label, ~"Deliverable" or ~"Stretch", when scheduled in the current milestone.
To prevent the misunderstanding that a feature will be be delivered in the
assigned milestone, when only UX design is planned for that milestone, the
Product Manager should create a separate issue for the ~"design artifact",
assign the ~UX, ~"design artifact" and ~"Deliverable" labels, add a milestone
and use a title that makes it clear that the scheduled issue is design only
(e.g. `Design exploration for XYZ`).
When the ~"design artifact" issue has been completed, the UXer removes the ~UX
label, adds the ~"UX ready" label and closes the issue. This indicates the
design artifact is complete. The UXer will also copy the designs to related
issues for implementation in an upcoming milestone.
<!-- END doctoc generated TOC please keep comment here to allow auto update -->
## Contribute to GitLab
For a first-time step-by-step guide to the contribution process, see
["Contributing to GitLab"](https://about.gitlab.com/contributing/).
Thank you for your interest in contributing to GitLab. This guide details how
to contribute to GitLab in a way that is efficient for everyone.
Looking for something to work on? Look for issues with the label [Accepting Merge Requests](#i-want-to-contribute).
GitLab comes into two flavors, GitLab Community Edition (CE) our free and open
source edition, and GitLab Enterprise Edition (EE) which is our commercial
edition. Throughout this guide you will see references to CE and EE for
abbreviation.
If you have read this guide and want to know how the GitLab [core team]
operates please see [the GitLab contributing process](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/PROCESS.md).
-[GitLab Inc engineers should refer to the engineering workflow document](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/workflow/)
## Security vulnerability disclosure
Please report suspected security vulnerabilities in private to
`support@gitlab.com`, also see the
[disclosure section on the GitLab.com website](https://about.gitlab.com/disclosure/).
Please do **NOT** create publicly viewable issues for suspected security
vulnerabilities.
## Code of conduct
As contributors and maintainers of this project, we pledge to respect all
people who contribute through reporting issues, posting feature requests,
updating documentation, submitting pull requests or patches, and other
activities.
We are committed to making participation in this project a harassment-free
experience for everyone, regardless of level of experience, gender, gender
identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance,
body size, race, ethnicity, age, or religion.
Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include the use of sexual
language or imagery, derogatory comments or personal attacks, trolling, public
or private harassment, insults, or other unprofessional conduct.
Project maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions
that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct. Project maintainers who do not
follow the Code of Conduct may be removed from the project team.
This code of conduct applies both within project spaces and in public spaces
when an individual is representing the project or its community.
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior can be
reported by emailing `contact@gitlab.com`.
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the [Contributor Covenant][contributor-covenant], version 1.1.0,
available at [http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/](http://contributor-covenant.org/version/1/1/0/).
## Closing policy for issues and merge requests
GitLab is a popular open source project and the capacity to deal with issues
and merge requests is limited. Out of respect for our volunteers, issues and
merge requests not in line with the guidelines listed in this document may be
closed without notice.
Please treat our volunteers with courtesy and respect, it will go a long way
towards getting your issue resolved.
Issues and merge requests should be in English and contain appropriate language
for audiences of all ages.
If a contributor is no longer actively working on a submitted merge request
we can decide that the merge request will be finished by one of our
[Merge request coaches][team] or close the merge request. We make this decision
based on how important the change is for our product vision. If a Merge request
coach is going to finish the merge request we assign the
~"coach will finish" label.
## Helping others
Please help other GitLab users when you can.
The methods people will use to seek help can be found on the [getting help page][getting-help].
Sign up for the mailing list, answer GitLab questions on StackOverflow or
respond in the IRC channel. You can also sign up on [CodeTriage][codetriage] to help with
the remaining issues on the GitHub issue tracker.
## I want to contribute!
If you want to contribute to GitLab [issues with the label `Accepting Merge Requests` and small weight][accepting-mrs-weight]
is a great place to start. Issues with a lower weight (1 or 2) are deemed
suitable for beginners. These issues will be of reasonable size and challenge,
for anyone to start contributing to GitLab. If you have any questions or need help visit [Getting Help](https://about.gitlab.com/getting-help/#discussion) to
learn how to communicate with GitLab. If you're looking for a Gitter or Slack channel
please consider we favor
[asynchronous communication](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/communication/#internal-communication) over real time communication. Thanks for your contribution!
## Contribution Flow
When contributing to GitLab, your merge request is subject to review by merge request maintainers of a particular specialty.
When you submit code to GitLab, we really want it to get merged, but there will be times when it will not be merged.
When maintainers are reading through a merge request they may request guidance from other maintainers. If merge request maintainers conclude that the code should not be merged, our reasons will be fully disclosed. If it has been decided that the code quality is not up to GitLab’s standards, the merge request maintainer will refer the author to our docs and code style guides, and provide some guidance.
Sometimes style guides will be followed but the code will lack structural integrity, or the maintainer will have reservations about the code’s overall quality. When there is a reservation the maintainer will inform the author and provide some guidance. The author may then choose to update the merge request. Once the merge request has been updated and reassigned to the maintainer, they will review the code again. Once the code has been resubmitted any number of times, the maintainer may choose to close the merge request with a summary of why it will not be merged, as well as some guidance. If the merge request is closed the maintainer will be open to discussion as to how to improve the code so it can be approved in the future.
GitLab will do its best to review community contributions as quickly as possible. Specially appointed developers review community contributions daily. You may take a look at the [team page](https://about.gitlab.com/team/) for the merge request coach who specializes in the type of code you have written and mention them in the merge request. For example, if you have written some JavaScript in your code then you should mention the frontend merge request coach. If your code has multiple disciplines you may mention multiple merge request coaches.
GitLab receives a lot of community contributions, so if your code has not been reviewed within 4 days of its initial submission feel free to re-mention the appropriate merge request coach.
When submitting code to GitLab, you may feel that your contribution requires the aid of an external library. If your code includes an external library please provide a link to the library, as well as reasons for including it.
When your code contains more than 500 changes, any major breaking changes, or an external library, `@mention` a maintainer in the merge request. If you are not sure who to mention, the reviewer will add one early in the merge request process.
## Workflow labels
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the current workflow labels.
### Type labels
This [documentation](./issue_worfklow.md) outlines the current type labels.
### Subject labels
This [documentation](./issue_worfklow.md) outlines the current subject labels.
### Team labels
This [documentation](./issue_worfklow.md) outlines the current team labels.
### Milestone labels
This [documentation](./issue_worfklow.md) outlines the current milestone labels.
### Bug Priority labels
This [documentation](./issue_worfklow.md) outlines the current bug priority labels.
### Bug Severity labels
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the current severity labels.
#### Severity impact guidance
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the current severity impact guidance.
### Label for community contributors
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the current policy regarding community contributor issues.
## Implement design & UI elements
This [documentation](./design.md) outlines the current design and UI guidelines.
## Issue tracker
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the issue tracker process.
### Issue triaging
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the current issue triaging process.
### Feature proposals
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the feature proposal process.
### Issue tracker guidelines
This [documentation](issue_workflow.md) outlines the issue tracker guidelines.
### Issue weight
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the issue weight guidelines.
### Regression issues
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the regression issue process.
### Technical and UX debt
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) about technical and UX debt has been moved.
### Stewardship
This [documentation](./issue_workflow.md) outlines the stewardship process.
## Merge requests
This [documentation](./merge_request_workflow.md) outlines the current merge request process.
### Merge request guidelines
This [documentation](./merge_request_workflow.md) outlines the current merge request guidelines.
### Contribution acceptance criteria
This [documentation](./merge_request_workflow.md) outlines the current acceptance criteria for contributions.
## Definition of done
This [documentation](./merge_request_workflow.md) outlines the definition of done.
## Style guides
This [documentation](./design.md) outlines the current style guidelines.
---
[Return to Development documentation](../README.md)
| ~S1 | Blocker | Outage, broken feature with no workaround | Unable to create an issue. Data corruption/loss. Security breach. |
| ~S2 | Critical Severity | Broken Feature, workaround too complex & unacceptable | Can push commits, but only via the command line. |
| ~S3 | Major Severity | Broken Feature, workaround acceptable | Can create merge requests only from the Merge Requests page, not through the Issue. |
| ~S4 | Low Severity | Functionality inconvenience or cosmetic issue | Label colors are incorrect / not being displayed. |
#### Severity impact guidance
Severity levels can be applied further depending on the facet of the impact; e.g. Affected customers, GitLab.com availability, performance and etc. The below is a guideline.
| ~S1 | >50% users affected (possible company extinction level event) | Significant impact on all of GitLab.com | |
| ~S2 | Many users or multiple paid customers affected (but not apocalyptic)| Significant impact on large portions of GitLab.com | Degradation is guaranteed to occur in the near future |
| ~S3 | A few users or a single paid customer affected | Limited impact on important portions of GitLab.com | Degradation is likely to occur in the near future |
| ~S4 | No paid users/customer affected, or expected to in the near future | Minor impact on on GitLab.com | Degradation _may_ occur but it's not likely |
### Label for community contributors
Issues that are beneficial to our users, 'nice to haves', that we currently do
not have the capacity for or want to give the priority to, are labeled as
~"Accepting Merge Requests", so the community can make a contribution.
Community contributors can submit merge requests for any issue they want, but
the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label has a special meaning. It points to
changes that:
1. We already agreed on,
1. Are well-defined,
1. Are likely to get accepted by a maintainer.
We want to avoid a situation when a contributor picks an
~"Accepting Merge Requests" issue and then their merge request gets closed,
because we realize that it does not fit our vision, or we want to solve it in a
different way.
We add the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label to:
- Low priority ~bug issues (i.e. we do not add it to the bugs that we want to
solve in the ~"Next Patch Release")
- Small ~"feature proposal"
- Small ~"technical debt" issues
After adding the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label, we try to estimate the
[weight](#issue-weight) of the issue. We use issue weight to let contributors
know how difficult the issue is. Additionally:
- We advertise ["Accepting Merge Requests" issues with weight < 5][up-for-grabs]
as suitable for people that have never contributed to GitLab before on the
[Up For Grabs campaign](http://up-for-grabs.net)
- We encourage people that have never contributed to any open source project to
look for ["Accepting Merge Requests" issues with a weight of 1][firt-timers]
If you've decided that you would like to work on an issue, please @-mention
the [appropriate product manager](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/#who-to-talk-to-for-what)
as soon as possible. The product manager will then pull in appropriate GitLab team
members to further discuss scope, design, and technical considerations. This will
ensure that that your contribution is aligned with the GitLab product and minimize
any rework and delay in getting it merged into master.
GitLab team members who apply the ~"Accepting Merge Requests" label to an issue
should update the issue description with a responsible product manager, inviting
any potential community contributor to @-mention per above.
To create a feature proposal for CE, open an issue on the
[issue tracker of CE][ce-tracker].
For feature proposals for EE, open an issue on the
[issue tracker of EE][ee-tracker].
In order to help track the feature proposals, we have created a
[`feature proposal`][fpl] label. For the time being, users that are not members
of the project cannot add labels. You can instead ask one of the [core team]
members to add the label ~"feature proposal" to the issue or add the following
code snippet right after your description in a new line: `~"feature proposal"`.
Please keep feature proposals as small and simple as possible, complex ones
might be edited to make them small and simple.
Please submit Feature Proposals using the ['Feature Proposal' issue template](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Feature Proposal.md) provided on the issue tracker.
For changes in the interface, it is helpful to include a mockup. Issues that add to, or change, the interface should
be given the ~"UX" label. This will allow the UX team to provide input and guidance. You may
need to ask one of the [core team] members to add the label, if you do not have permissions to do it by yourself.
If you want to create something yourself, consider opening an issue first to
discuss whether it is interesting to include this in GitLab.
### Issue tracker guidelines
**[Search the issue tracker][ce-tracker]** for similar entries before
submitting your own, there's a good chance somebody else had the same issue or
feature proposal. Show your support with an award emoji and/or join the
discussion.
Please submit bugs using the ['Bug' issue template](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Bug.md) provided on the issue tracker.
The text in the parenthesis is there to help you with what to include. Omit it
when submitting the actual issue. You can copy-paste it and then edit as you
see fit.
### Issue weight
Issue weight allows us to get an idea of the amount of work required to solve
one or multiple issues. This makes it possible to schedule work more accurately.
You are encouraged to set the weight of any issue. Following the guidelines
below will make it easy to manage this, without unnecessary overhead.
1. Set weight for any issue at the earliest possible convenience
1. If you don't agree with a set weight, discuss with other developers until
consensus is reached about the weight
1. Issue weights are an abstract measurement of complexity of the issue. Do not
relate issue weight directly to time. This is called [anchoring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring)
and something you want to avoid.
1. Something that has a weight of 1 (or no weight) is really small and simple.
Something that is 9 is rewriting a large fundamental part of GitLab,
which might lead to many hard problems to solve. Changing some text in GitLab
is probably 1, adding a new Git Hook maybe 4 or 5, big features 7-9.
1. If something is very large, it should probably be split up in multiple
issues or chunks. You can simply not set the weight of a parent issue and set
weights to children issues.
### Regression issues
Every monthly release has a corresponding issue on the CE issue tracker to keep
track of functionality broken by that release and any fixes that need to be
included in a patch release (see [8.3 Regressions] as an example).
As outlined in the issue description, the intended workflow is to post one note
with a reference to an issue describing the regression, and then to update that
note with a reference to the merge request that fixes it as it becomes available.
If you're a contributor who doesn't have the required permissions to update
other users' notes, please post a new note with a reference to both the issue
and the merge request.
The release manager will [update the notes] in the regression issue as fixes are
1. For tests that use Capybara or PhantomJS, see this [article on how
to write reliable asynchronous tests](https://robots.thoughtbot.com/write-reliable-asynchronous-integration-tests-with-capybara).
Please keep the change in a single MR **as small as possible**. If you want to
contribute a large feature think very hard what the minimum viable change is.
Can you split the functionality? Can you only submit the backend/API code? Can
you start with a very simple UI? Can you do part of the refactor? The increased
reviewability of small MRs that leads to higher code quality is more important
to us than having a minimal commit log. The smaller an MR is the more likely it
is it will be merged (quickly). After that you can send more MRs to enhance it.
The ['How to get faster PR reviews' document of Kubernetes](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/faster_reviews.md) also has some great points regarding this.
For examples of feedback on merge requests please look at already
[closed merge requests][closed-merge-requests]. If you would like quick feedback
on your merge request feel free to mention someone from the [core team] or one
of the [Merge request coaches][team].
Please ensure that your merge request meets the contribution acceptance criteria.
When having your code reviewed and when reviewing merge requests please take the
[code review guidelines](../code_review.md) into account.
### Contribution acceptance criteria
1. The change is as small as possible
1. Include proper tests and make all tests pass (unless it contains a test
exposing a bug in existing code). Every new class should have corresponding
unit tests, even if the class is exercised at a higher level, such as a feature test.
1. If you suspect a failing CI build is unrelated to your contribution, you may
try and restart the failing CI job or ask a developer to fix the
aforementioned failing test
1. Your MR initially contains a single commit (please use `git rebase -i` to
squash commits)
1. Your changes can merge without problems (if not please rebase if you're the
only one working on your feature branch, otherwise, merge `master`)
1. Does not break any existing functionality
1. Fixes one specific issue or implements one specific feature (do not combine
things, send separate merge requests if needed)
1. Migrations should do only one thing (e.g., either create a table, move data
to a new table or remove an old table) to aid retrying on failure
1. Keeps the GitLab code base clean and well structured
1. Contains functionality we think other users will benefit from too
1. Doesn't add configuration options or settings options since they complicate
making and testing future changes
1. Changes do not adversely degrade performance.
- Avoid repeated polling of endpoints that require a significant amount of overhead
- Check for N+1 queries via the SQL log or [`QueryRecorder`](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/mer ge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- Avoid repeated access of filesystem
1. If you need polling to support real-time features, please use
[polling with ETag caching][polling-etag].
1. Changes after submitting the merge request should be in separate commits
(no squashing).
1. It conforms to the [style guides](#style-guides) and the following:
- If your change touches a line that does not follow the style, modify the
entire line to follow it. This prevents linting tools from generating warnings.
- Don't touch neighbouring lines. As an exception, automatic mass
refactoring modifications may leave style non-compliant.
1. If the merge request adds any new libraries (gems, JavaScript libraries,
etc.), they should conform to our [Licensing guidelines][license-finder-doc].
See the instructions in that document for help if your MR fails the
"license-finder" test with a "Dependencies that need approval" error.
1. The merge request meets the [definition of done](#definition-of-done).
## Definition of done
If you contribute to GitLab please know that changes involve more than just
code. We have the following [definition of done][definition-of-done]. Please ensure you support
the feature you contribute through all of these steps.
1. Description explaining the relevancy (see following item)
1. Working and clean code that is commented where needed
1.[Unit, integration, and system tests][testing] that pass on the CI server
1. Performance/scalability implications have been considered, addressed, and tested
1.[Documented][doc-guidelines] in the `/doc` directory
1.[Changelog entry added][changelog], if necessary
1. Reviewed and any concerns are addressed
1. Merged by a project maintainer
1. Added to the release blog article, if relevant
1. Added to [the website](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/), if relevant
1. Community questions answered
1. Answers to questions radiated (in docs/wiki/support etc.)
If you add a dependency in GitLab (such as an operating system package) please
consider updating the following and note the applicability of each in your
merge request:
1. Note the addition in the release blog post (create one if it doesn't exist yet) https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/merge_requests/
1. Upgrade guide, for example https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/update/7.5-to-7.6.md
