Following is the current list of maintainers on this project
The maintainers are listed in alphabetical order.
- Michael Hind (michaelhind)
- Sam Hoffman (hoffmansc)
- Karthi Natesan Ramamurthy (nrkarthikeyan)
- Prasanna Sattigeri (pronics2004)
- Animesh Singh (animeshsingh)
- Kush Varshney (krvarshney)
This repository does not have a traditional release management cycle, but should instead be maintained as a useful, working, and polished reference at all times. While all work can therefore be focused on the master branch, the quality of this branch should never be compromised.
The remainder of this document details how to merge pull requests to the repositories.
The project maintainers use LGTM (Looks Good To Me) in comments on the pull request to indicate acceptance prior to merging. A change requires LGTMs from two project maintainers. If the code is written by a maintainer, the change only requires one additional LGTM.
We recommend reviewing pull requests directly within GitHub. This allows a public commentary on changes, providing transparency for all users. When providing feedback be civil, courteous, and kind. Disagreement is fine, so long as the discourse is carried out politely. If we see a record of uncivil or abusive comments, we will revoke your commit privileges and invite you to leave the project.
During your review, consider the following points:
Some proposed changes may not represent a positive impact to the project. Ask whether or not the change will make understanding the code easier, or if it could simply be a personal preference on the part of the author (see bikeshedding).
Pull requests that do not have a clear positive impact should be closed without merging.
If you do not understand what the changes are or what they accomplish, ask the author for clarification. Ask the author to add comments and/or clarify test case names to make the intentions clear.
At times, such clarification will reveal that the author may not be using the code correctly, or is unaware of features that accommodate their needs. If you feel this is the case, work up a code sample that would address the pull request for them, and feel free to close the pull request once they confirm.
For any given pull request, ask yourself "is this a new feature?" If so, does the pull request (or associated issue) contain narrative indicating the need for the feature? If not, ask them to provide that information.
Are new unit tests in place that test all new behaviors introduced? If not, do not merge the feature until they are! Is documentation in place for the new feature? (See the documentation guidelines). If not do not merge the feature until it is! Is the feature necessary for general use cases? Try and keep the scope of any given component narrow. If a proposed feature does not fit that scope, recommend to the user that they maintain the feature on their own, and close the request. You may also recommend that they see if the feature gains traction among other users, and suggest they re-submit when they can show such support.