@ -4,8 +4,48 @@ Contributing to Weston
Sending patches
---------------
Patches should be sent to **wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org** , using
`git send-email` . See [git documentation] for help.
Patches should be sent via
[GitLab merge requests ](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/gitlab-basics/add-merge-request.html ).
Weston is
[hosted on freedesktop.org's GitLab ](https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/ ):
in order to submit code, you should create an account on this GitLab instance,
fork the core Weston repository, push your changes to a branch in your new
repository, and then submit these patches for review through a merge request.
Weston formerly accepted patches via `git-send-email` , sent to
**wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org**; these were
[tracked using Patchwork ](https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/projects/wayland/ ).
Some old patches continue to be sent this way, and we may accept small new
patches sent to the list, but please send all new patches through GitLab merge
requests.
Formatting and separating commits
---------------------------------
Unlike many projects using GitHub and GitLab, Weston has a
[linear, 'recipe' style history ](http://www.bitsnbites.eu/git-history-work-log-vs-recipe/ ).
This means that every commit should be small, digestible, stand-alone, and
functional. Rather than a purely chronological commit history like this:
doc: final docs for view transforms
fix tests when disabled, redo broken doc formatting
better transformed-view iteration (thanks Hannah!)
try to catch more cases in tests
tests: add new spline test
fix compilation on splines
doc: notes on reticulating splines
compositor: add spline reticulation for view transforms
we aim to have a clean history which only reflects the final state, broken up
into functional groupings:
compositor: add spline reticulation for view transforms
compositor: new iterator for view transforms
tests: add view-transform correctness tests
doc: fix Doxygen formatting for view transforms
This ensures that the final patch series only contains the final state,
without the changes and missteps taken along the development process.
The first line of a commit message should contain a prefix indicating
what part is affected by the patch followed by one sentence that
@ -54,74 +94,37 @@ deserve, and the patches may cause redundant review effort.
Tracking patches and following up
---------------------------------
[Wayland Patchwork ](http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/wayland/list/ ) is
used for tracking patches to Wayland and Weston. Xwayland patches are tracked
with the [Xorg project ](https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/Xorg/list/ )
instead. Libinput patches, even though they use the same mailing list as
Wayland, are not tracked in the Wayland Patchwork.
The following applies only to Wayland and Weston.
If a patch is not found in Patchwork, there is a high possibility for it to be
forgotten. Patches attached to bug reports or not arriving to the mailing list
because of e.g. subscription issues will not be in Patchwork because Patchwork
only collects patches sent to the list.
When you send a revised version of a patch, it would be very nice to mark your
old patch as superseded (or rejected, if that is applicable). You can change
the status of your own patches by registering to Patchwork - ownership is
identified by email address you use to register. Updating your patch status
appropriately will help maintainer work.
The following patch states are found in Patchwork:
- **New** :
Patches under discussion or not yet processed.
- **Under review** :
Mostly unused state.
- **Accepted** :
The patch is merged in the master branch upstream, as is or slightly
modified.
- **Rejected** :
The idea or approach is rejected and cannot be fixed by revising
the patch.
- **RFC** :
Request for comments, not meant to be merged as is.
- **Not applicable** :
The email was not actually a patch, or the patch is not for Wayland or
Weston. Libinput patches are usually automatically ignored by Wayland
Patchwork, but if they get through, they will be marked as Not
applicable.
- **Changes requested** :
Reviewers determined that changes to the patch are needed. The
submitter is expected to send a revised version. (You should
not wait for your patch to be set to this state before revising,
though.)
- **Awaiting upstream** :
Mostly unused as the patch is waiting for upstream actions but
is not shown in the default list, which means it is easy to
overlook.
- **Superseded** :
A revised version of the patch has been submitted.
- **Deferred** :
Used mostly during freeze periods before releases, to temporarily
hide patches that cannot be merged during a freeze.
Note, that in the default listing, only patches in *New* or *Under review* are
shown.
There is also a command line interface to Patchwork called `pwclient` , see
http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/wayland/
for links where to get it and the sample `.pwclientrc` for Wayland/Weston.
Once submitted to GitLab, your patches will be reviewed by the Weston
development team on GitLab. Review may be entirely positive and result in your
code landing instantly, in which case, great! You're done. However, we may ask
you to make some revisions: fixing some bugs we've noticed, working to a
slightly different design, or adding documentation and tests.
If you do get asked to revise the patches, please bear in mind the notes above.
You should use `git rebase -i` to make revisions, so that your patches follow
the clear linear split documented above. Following that split makes it easier
for reviewers to understand your work, and to verify that the code you're
submitting is correct.
A common request is to split single large patch into multiple patches. This can
happen, for example, if when adding a new feature you notice a bug in Weston's
core which you need to fix to progress. Separating these changes into separate
commits will allow us to verify and land the bugfix quickly, pushing part of
your work for the good of everyone, whilst revision and discussion continues on
the larger feature part. It also allows us to direct you towards reviewers who
best understand the different areas you are working on.
When you have made any requested changes, please rebase the commits, verify
that they still individually look good, then force-push your new branch to
GitLab. This will update the merge request and notify everyone subscribed to
your merge request, so they can review it again.
There are also
[many GitLab CLI clients ](https://about.gitlab.com/applications/#cli-clients ),
if you prefer to avoid the web interface. It may be difficult to follow review
comments without using the web interface though, so we do recommend using this
to go through the review process, even if you use other clients to track the
list of available patches.
Coding style
Daniel Stone
6 years ago