Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
The little over-engineer that's in me, suggests that we could automatize all the checks 😁 We should add a contributions page, but I'll keep it minimal, because reading is boring, when you have a new project to start playing with 🙂 I would add a few details about the tuner and links to readme sections where we add more details about the architecture & co. The rest to be done by pre-commit hooks and Danger on CI. What do you think? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I agree, I wouldn't create a long white paper, but at least with the minimum information about:
The purpose is to speed up the developer and avoid wasting time reading the pre-commit or CI outputs, I'm writing this because I have seen #49 , where parts of the feedback are related to a set of conventions that we took during the first discussions. Of course, they are defined in the pre-commit script, but listing them somewhere could help IMO. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Ideally, the tuner scripts would be completely optional since everything would be managed by the CI and they would be just additional checks to have a faster local failure. Said that, I agree that having a |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Given the project is public and developers are going to work on it, I think it could be a good idea to create a
CONTRIBUTING.md
in order to provide our conventions in terms of:tuner.sh
Maybe @4face-studi0 @fondesa have other ideas, because part of these things was discussed and put in place during the infra-step.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions