Commit c71cacb0 authored by Tomek Mrugalski's avatar Tomek Mrugalski 🛰
Browse files

[#633] Contributors guide wrapped

 - should be readable as a plain text
parent 1bfc766d
# Kea Contributor's Guide
So you found a bug in Kea or plan to develop an extension and want to send us a patch? Great! This page will explain how to contribute your changes smoothly.
So you found a bug in Kea or plan to develop an extension and want to send us a patch? Great! This
page will explain how to contribute your changes smoothly.
Here's a quick list of how to contribute a patch:
1. **create account** on [gitlab](https://gitlab.isc.org)
2. **open an issue** in [Kea project](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/issues/new), make sure it describes what you want to fix and **why**
3. **ask someone from the ISC team to give you permission to fork Kea** (ask @tomek, @vicky, @ondrej or @godfryd or basically anyone from the Kea dev team)
4. **fork Kea code**: go to Kea project page, click [Fork button](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/forks/new). If you can't, you didn't complete step 3.
5. **Implement your fix or feature, push code** to your repo. Make sure it compiles, has unit-tests, is documented and does what it's supposed to do.
6. **Open Merge Request**: go to Kea project [merge requests page](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests), click [New merge request](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests/new). If you don't see the button, you didn't complete step 3.
7. **Participate in the code review**: Once you submit the MR, someone from ISC will eventually get to the issue and will review your code. Please make sure you respond to comments. It's likely you'll be asked to update the code.
2. **open an issue** in [Kea project](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/issues/new), make sure
it describes what you want to fix and **why**
3. **ask someone from the ISC team to give you permission to fork Kea** (ask @tomek, @vicky, @ondrej
or @godfryd or basically anyone from the Kea dev team)
4. **fork Kea code**: go to Kea project page, click [Fork button](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/forks/new).
If you can't, you didn't complete step 3.
5. **Implement your fix or feature, push code** to your repo. Make sure it compiles, has unit-tests,
is documented and does what it's supposed to do.
6. **Open Merge Request**: go to Kea project [merge requests page](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests),
click [New merge request](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests/new). If you
don't see the button, you didn't complete step 3.
7. **Participate in the code review**: Once you submit the MR, someone from ISC will eventually get
to the issue and will review your code. Please make sure you respond to comments. It's likely
you'll be asked to update the code.
For a much more detailed description with details, see the text below.
## Writing a patch
Before you start working on a patch or a new feature, it is a good idea to discuss it first with Kea developers.
You can post your questions to the [kea-dev](https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-dev) or
[kea-users](https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users) mailing lists. The kea-users is intended for users
who are not interested in the internal workings or development details of Kea: it is OK to ask for feedback
regarding new design or the best proposed solution to a certain problem. This is the best place to get user's
feedback. The internal details, questions about the code and its internals are better asked on kea-dev.
OK, so you have written a patch? Great! Before you submit it, make sure that your code compiles. This may
seem obvious, but there's more to it. You have surely checked that it compiles on your system, but Kea is
a portable software. Besides Linux, it is compiled and used on relatively uncommon systems like OpenBSD. Will
your code compile and work there? What about endianness? It is likely that you used a regular x86 architecture
machine to write your patch, but the software is expected to run on many other architectures. You may take
a look at [system specific build notes](https://kb.isc.org/docs/installing-kea). For a complete list of
systems we build on, you may take a look at the [Jenkins build farm](https://jenkins.isc.org/).
Does your patch conform to [Kea coding guidelines](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/wikis/coding-guidelines)?
You can submit a patch that does not adhere to them, but that will reduce its chances of being accepted.
If the deviations are minor, one of the Kea engineers who does the review will likely fix the issues.
However, if there are lots of issues, the reviewer may simply reject the patch and ask you to fix it before re-submitting.
Before you start working on a patch or a new feature, it is a good idea to discuss it first with Kea
developers. You can post your questions to the [kea-dev](https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-dev)
or [kea-users](https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users) mailing lists. The kea-users is
intended for users who are not interested in the internal workings or development details of Kea: it
is OK to ask for feedback regarding new design or the best proposed solution to a certain
problem. This is the best place to get user's feedback. The internal details, questions about the
code and its internals are better asked on kea-dev.
OK, so you have written a patch? Great! Before you submit it, make sure that your code
compiles. This may seem obvious, but there's more to it. You have surely checked that it compiles on
your system, but Kea is a portable software. Besides Linux, it is compiled and used on relatively
uncommon systems like OpenBSD. Will your code compile and work there? What about endianness? It is
likely that you used a regular x86 architecture machine to write your patch, but the software is
expected to run on many other architectures. You may take a look at [system specific build
notes](https://kb.isc.org/docs/installing-kea). For a complete list of systems we build on, you may
take a look at the [Jenkins build farm](https://jenkins.isc.org/).
Does your patch conform to [Kea coding
guidelines](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/wikis/coding-guidelines)? You can submit a
patch that does not adhere to them, but that will reduce its chances of being accepted. If the
deviations are minor, one of the Kea engineers who does the review will likely fix the issues.
However, if there are lots of issues, the reviewer may simply reject the patch and ask you to fix it
before re-submitting.
## Running unit-tests
One of the ground rules in Kea development is that every piece of code has to be tested. We now have an
extensive set of unit-tests for almost every line of code. Even if you are fixing something small, like a
single line fix, you are encouraged to write unit-tests for that change. That is even more true for new code:
if you write a new function, method or a class, you definitely should write unit-tests for it.
To ensure that everything is tested, ISC uses a development method called [Test Driven Development (TDD)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test-driven_development). In
TDD, a feature is developed alongside the tests, preferably with the tests being written first. In detail, a test is
written for a small piece of functionality and run against the existing code. (In the case where the test is
a unit test for a function, it would be run against an empty (unimplemented) function.) The test should fail.
A minimal amount of code is then written, just enough to get the test to pass. Then the process is repeated for
the next small piece of functionality. This continues until all the functionality has been implemented.
One of the ground rules in Kea development is that every piece of code has to be tested. We now have
an extensive set of unit-tests for almost every line of code. Even if you are fixing something
small, like a single line fix, you are encouraged to write unit-tests for that change. That is even
more true for new code: if you write a new function, method or a class, you definitely should write
unit-tests for it.
To ensure that everything is tested, ISC uses a development method called [Test Driven Development
(TDD)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test-driven_development). In TDD, a feature is developed
alongside the tests, preferably with the tests being written first. In detail, a test is written for
a small piece of functionality and run against the existing code. (In the case where the test is a
unit test for a function, it would be run against an empty (unimplemented) function.) The test
should fail. A minimal amount of code is then written, just enough to get the test to pass. Then
the process is repeated for the next small piece of functionality. This continues until all the
functionality has been implemented.
This approach has two advantages:
- By writing a test first and then only enough code to pass the test, that code is fully tested. By repeating
this process until the feature is fully implemented, all the code gets test coverage. You avoid the situation
where not enough tests have been written to check all the code.
- By running the test before the code implementing the function is written and observing the test fail, you can
detect the situation where a bug in the test code will cause it to pass regardless of the code being tested.
- By writing a test first and then only enough code to pass the test, that code is fully tested. By
repeating this process until the feature is fully implemented, all the code gets test
coverage. You avoid the situation where not enough tests have been written to check all the
code.
Initially, some people unfamiliar with that approach react with "but my change is simple and I tested that it
works". That approach is both insufficient and short-sighted. It is insufficient, because manual testing is by
definition laborious and can't really be done on the multitude of systems we run Kea on. It is short-sighted,
because even with your best intentions you will not be able to dedicate any significant amount of time for repeated
testing of your improved code. The old ISC DHCP has two decades of history behind it and we hope to make Kea last
similar time span. Over such long periods, code tends to be refactored several times. The change you made may be
affected by some other change or by the code that hasn't been written yet.
- By running the test before the code implementing the function is written and observing the test
fail, you can detect the situation where a bug in the test code will cause it to pass regardless
of the code being tested.
See Building Kea with Unit Tests for instructions on how to run unit-tests. If you happen to touch any database
related code, make sure you compile your code with –with-mysql, –with-pgsql and/or –with-cql as needed. For example,
if you change something substantial, make sure the other compilation options still work.
Initially, some people unfamiliar with that approach react with "but my change is simple and I
tested that it works". That approach is both insufficient and short-sighted. It is insufficient,
because manual testing is by definition laborious and can't really be done on the multitude of
systems we run Kea on. It is short-sighted, because even with your best intentions you will not be
able to dedicate any significant amount of time for repeated testing of your improved code. The old
ISC DHCP has two decades of history behind it and we hope to make Kea last similar time span. Over
such long periods, code tends to be refactored several times. The change you made may be affected by
some other change or by the code that hasn't been written yet.
If you happen to add new files or have modified any Makefile.am files, it is also a good idea to check if you haven't
broken the distribution process:
See Building Kea with Unit Tests for instructions on how to run unit-tests. If you happen to touch
any database related code, make sure you compile your code with –with-mysql, –with-pgsql and/or
–with-cql as needed. For example, if you change something substantial, make sure the other
compilation options still work.
If you happen to add new files or have modified any Makefile.am files, it is also a good idea to
check if you haven't broken the distribution process:
```bash
make distcheck
```
There are other useful switches which can be passed to configure. It is always a good idea to use `–enable-logger-checks`,
which does sanity checks on logger parameters. Use `–-enable-debug` to enable various additional consistency checks
that reduce performance but help during development. If you happen to modify anything in the documentation, use
`–-enable-generate-docs`. If you are modifying DHCP code, you are likely to be interested in enabling a non-default
database backends for DHCP. Note that if the backend is not enabled, the database-specific unit-tests are skipped.
To enable the MySQL backend, use the switch `–with-mysql`; for PostgreSQL, use `–with-pgsql` and for Cassandra use
`--with-cql`. A complete list of all switches can be obtained with the command:
There are other useful switches which can be passed to configure. It is always a good idea to use
`–enable-logger-checks`, which does sanity checks on logger parameters. Use `–-enable-debug` to
enable various additional consistency checks that reduce performance but help during development. If
you happen to modify anything in the documentation, use `–-enable-generate-docs`. If you are
modifying DHCP code, you are likely to be interested in enabling a non-default database backends for
DHCP. Note that if the backend is not enabled, the database-specific unit-tests are skipped. To
enable the MySQL backend, use the switch `–with-mysql`; for PostgreSQL, use `–with-pgsql` and for
Cassandra use `--with-cql`. A complete list of all switches can be obtained with the command:
```bash
./configure --help
......@@ -91,107 +113,139 @@ To enable the MySQL backend, use the switch `–with-mysql`; for PostgreSQL, use
## Submitting Merge Request (also known as sending your patch the right way)
The first step in writing the patch or new feature should be to get the source code from our Git repository.
The procedure is very easy and is [explained here](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/wikis/processes/gitlab-howto).
While it is possible to provide a patch against the latest stable release, it makes the review process much
easier if it is for latest code from the Git master branch.
The first step in writing the patch or new feature should be to get the source code from our Git
repository. The procedure is very easy and is [explained
here](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/wikis/processes/gitlab-howto). While it is possible
to provide a patch against the latest stable release, it makes the review process much easier if it
is for latest code from the Git master branch.
ISC uses [gitlab](https://gitlab.isc.org) to manage its source code. While we also maintain presence on [github](https://github.com/isc-projects/kea),
the process of syncing gitlab to github is mostly automated and Kea devs rarely look at github.
ISC uses [gitlab](https://gitlab.isc.org) to manage its source code. While we also maintain presence
on [github](https://github.com/isc-projects/kea), the process of syncing gitlab to github is mostly
automated and Kea devs rarely look at github.
ISC's gitlab has been a target for spammers in the past, so it is now set up defensively. In particular, new users
can't fork the code on their own and it requires someone from ISC to manually grant the ability to fork projects.
Fortunately, this is easy to do and we glady do this for anyone who asks and provides a good reason. "I'd like to fix
bug X or develop feature Y" is an excellent reason. The best place for asking is either kea-dev or asking in a comment
in your issue. Make sure you put a name tag (@tomek, @godfryd, @vicky or @ondrej). When you write a comment in an issue or merge
request and add a name tag on it, the user is automatically notified.
ISC's gitlab has been a target for spammers in the past, so it is now set up defensively. In
particular, new users can't fork the code on their own and it requires someone from ISC to manually
grant the ability to fork projects. Fortunately, this is easy to do and we glady do this for anyone
who asks and provides a good reason. "I'd like to fix bug X or develop feature Y" is an excellent
reason. The best place for asking is either kea-dev or asking in a comment in your issue. Make sure
you put a name tag (@tomek, @godfryd, @vicky or @ondrej). When you write a comment in an issue or
merge request and add a name tag on it, the user is automatically notified.
Once you fork the Kea code in gitlab, you have your own copy and you can commit your changes there and push them
to your copy of Kea repo. Once you feel that your patch is ready, go to Kea project and [submit a Merge Request](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests/new).
Once you fork the Kea code in gitlab, you have your own copy and you can commit your changes there
and push them to your copy of Kea repo. Once you feel that your patch is ready, go to Kea project
and [submit a Merge Request](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests/new).
If you can't access this link or don't see New Merge Request button on the [merge requests page](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests),
please ask on kea-dev and someone will help you out.
If you can't access this link or don't see New Merge Request button on the [merge requests
page](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/merge_requests), please ask on kea-dev and someone
will help you out.
## Send Pull Request on github
If you can't send the patch on gitlab, the next best preferred way is to send pull request (PR) on [github](https://github.com/isc-projects/kea).
This is almost as good as sending MR on gitlab. The downside is that Kea devs don't look at github too frequently,
so it may be a while before we notice it. And when we do, the chances are we will be busy with other things. With
gitlab, your MR will stare at us the whole time, so we'll get round to it much quicker. But we understand that there
are some cases where people may prefer github over gitlab.
See the excellent documentation on github: https://help.github.com/articles/creating-a-pull-request/ for details.
\In essence, you need github account (spam/hassle free, takes one minute to set up). Then you can fork the Kea
repository, commit changes to your repo and ask us to pull your changes into official Kea repository. This has a
number of advantages. First, it is made against a specific code version, which can be easily checked with git log
command. Second, this request pops up instantly on our list of open pull requests and will stay there. The third
benefit is that the pull request mechanism is very flexible. Kea engineers (and other users, too) can comment on
it, attach links, mention other users etc. You as a submitter can augment the patch by committing extra changes
to your repository. Those extra commits will appear instantly in the pull request. This is really useful during
the review. Finally, Kea developers can better assess all open pull requests and add labels to them, such as
"enhancement", "bug", or "unit-tests missing". This makes our life easier. Oh, and your commits will later be shown
as yours in github history. If you care for that kind of things, once the patch is merged, you'll be automatically
listed as contributor and Kea will be listed as project you have contributed to.
## If you really can't do MR on gitlab or PR on github...
If you can't send the patch on gitlab, the next best preferred way is to send pull request (PR) on
[github](https://github.com/isc-projects/kea).
This is almost as good as sending MR on gitlab. The downside is that Kea devs don't look at github
too frequently, so it may be a while before we notice it. And when we do, the chances are we will be
busy with other things. With gitlab, your MR will stare at us the whole time, so we'll get round to
it much quicker. But we understand that there are some cases where people may prefer github over
gitlab.
See the excellent documentation on github: https://help.github.com/articles/creating-a-pull-request/
for details. In essence, you need github account (spam/hassle free, takes one minute to set
up). Then you can fork the Kea repository, commit changes to your repo and ask us to pull your
changes into official Kea repository. This has a number of advantages. First, it is made against a
specific code version, which can be easily checked with git log command. Second, this request pops
up instantly on our list of open pull requests and will stay there. The third benefit is that the
pull request mechanism is very flexible. Kea engineers (and other users, too) can comment on it,
attach links, mention other users etc. You as a submitter can augment the patch by committing extra
changes to your repository. Those extra commits will appear instantly in the pull request. This is
really useful during the review. Finally, Kea developers can better assess all open pull requests
and add labels to them, such as "enhancement", "bug", or "unit-tests missing". This makes our life
easier. Oh, and your commits will later be shown as yours in github history. If you care for that
kind of things, once the patch is merged, you'll be automatically listed as contributor and Kea will
be listed as project you have contributed to.
Well, you are out of luck. There are other ways, but those are really awkward and the chances of your patch
being ignored are really high. Anyway, here they are:
- [create an issue in the Kea Gitlab](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/issues/new) and attach your patch to it. Sending
a patch has a number of disadvantages. First, if you don't specify the base version against which it was created,
one of Kea developers will have to guess that or go through a series of trials and errors to find that out. If the
code doesn't compile, the reviewer will not know if the patch is broken or maybe it was applied to incorrect base
code. Another frequent problem is that it may be possible that the patch didn't include any new files you have added.
If we happen to have any comments that you as submitter are expected to address (and in the overwhelming majority of
cases, we have), you will be asked to send an updated patch. It is not uncommon to see several rounds of such reviews,
so this can get very complicated very quickly. Please don't add your issue to any milestone. Kea team has a process
of going through issues unassigned to any milestone. Kea developers review new issues once a week and assign them to specific milestones. Please do not add issues to working milestones directly. Having an issue in gitlab ensures that the patch will never be forgotten and it will show up on our gitlab reports. It's not required, but much appreciated if you send a short note to the kea-dev mailing list explaining what
you did with the code and announce the issue number.
- Send a patch to the kea-dev list. This is the third preferred method, if you can't or don't want to use gitlab and github. If you send a patch to a mailing list in a wrong time, e.g. shortly before a release, Kea developers may miss it or perhaps they will see it and then forget about it. Nevertheless, it is still doable and we successfully accepted patches that way. It just takes more time from everyone involved, so it's a slower process in general.
## If you really can't do MR on gitlab or PR on github...
- Send a tarball with your modified code. This is really the worst way one can contribute a patch. It has a number of disadvantages. In particular, someone will need to find out which version the code was based on and generate the patch. It's not rocket science, but it may be a very mundane thing to do if the Kea developer does not know the version in advance. The mailing list has a limit on the message size (for good reasons), so you'll likely need to upload it somewhere first. Kea developers often don't pick up new issues instantly, so it may have to wait weeks before the tarball is looked at. The tarball does not benefit from most of the advantages mentioned for github, like the ability to easily update the code, have a meaningful discussion or see what the exact scope of changes are. Nevertheless, if we given a choice of getting a tarball or not getting a patch at all, we prefer tarballs. Just keep in mind that processing a tarball is really cumbersome for Kea developers, so it may take significantly longer than other ways.
Well, you are out of luck. There are other ways, but those are really awkward and the chances of
your patch being ignored are really high. Anyway, here they are:
- [create an issue in the Kea Gitlab](https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/kea/issues/new) and attach
your patch to it. Sending a patch has a number of disadvantages. First, if you don't specify the
base version against which it was created, one of Kea developers will have to guess that or go
through a series of trials and errors to find that out. If the code doesn't compile, the reviewer
will not know if the patch is broken or maybe it was applied to incorrect base code. Another
frequent problem is that it may be possible that the patch didn't include any new files you have
added. If we happen to have any comments that you as submitter are expected to address (and in
the overwhelming majority of cases, we have), you will be asked to send an updated patch. It is
not uncommon to see several rounds of such reviews, so this can get very complicated very
quickly. Please don't add your issue to any milestone. Kea team has a process of going through
issues unassigned to any milestone. Kea developers review new issues once a week and assign them
to specific milestones. Please do not add issues to working milestones directly. Having an issue
in gitlab ensures that the patch will never be forgotten and it will show up on our gitlab
reports. It's not required, but much appreciated if you send a short note to the kea-dev mailing
list explaining what you did with the code and announce the issue number.
- Send a patch to the kea-dev list. This is the third preferred method, if you can't or don't want
to use gitlab and github. If you send a patch to a mailing list in a wrong time, e.g. shortly
before a release, Kea developers may miss it or perhaps they will see it and then forget about
it. Nevertheless, it is still doable and we successfully accepted patches that way. It just takes
more time from everyone involved, so it's a slower process in general.
- Send a tarball with your modified code. This is really the worst way one can contribute a
patch. It has a number of disadvantages. In particular, someone will need to find out which
version the code was based on and generate the patch. It's not rocket science, but it may be a
very mundane thing to do if the Kea developer does not know the version in advance. The mailing
list has a limit on the message size (for good reasons), so you'll likely need to upload it
somewhere first. Kea developers often don't pick up new issues instantly, so it may have to wait
weeks before the tarball is looked at. The tarball does not benefit from most of the advantages
mentioned for github, like the ability to easily update the code, have a meaningful discussion or
see what the exact scope of changes are. Nevertheless, if we given a choice of getting a tarball
or not getting a patch at all, we prefer tarballs. Just keep in mind that processing a tarball is
really cumbersome for Kea developers, so it may take significantly longer than other ways.
## Going through a review
Once you make your patch available using one of the ways above, the action is on
one of the Kea developers. We need an issue. While we can create it on our own,
we prefer the original submitter fill them in as he or she has the best
understanding of the purpose of the change and may have any extra information
about OS, version, why it was done this specific way etc. If there is no MR and
no gitlab issue, you risk the issue not showing up on ISC radars. Depending on
the subjective importance and urgency as perceived by the ISC engineer, the
issue or PR will be assigned to one of the milestones.
Sooner or later, one of Kea developers will do the review. Here's the tricky part. One of Kea developers will
review your patch, but it may not happen immediately. Unfortunately, developers are usually working under a tight
schedule, so any extra unplanned review work may take a while. Having said that, we value external
contributions very much and will do whatever we can to review patches in a timely manner. Don't get discouraged
if your patch is not accepted after first review. To keep the code quality high, we use the same review processes
for external patches as we do for internal code. It may take some cycles of review/updated patch submissions
before the code is finally accepted. The nature of the review process is that it emphasizes areas that need
improvement. If you are not used to the review process, you may get the impression that the feedback is negative.
It is not: even the Kea developers seldom see reviews that say "All OK please merge".
Once the process is almost complete, the developer will likely ask you how you would like to be credited.
The typical answers are by first and last name, by nickname, by company name or anonymously. Typically we will
add a note to the ChangeLog and also set you as the author of the commit applying the patch and update the
contributors section in the AUTHORS file. If the contributed feature is big or critical for whatever reason,
it may also be mentioned in release notes.
Sadly, we sometimes see patches that are submitted and then the submitter never responds to our comments or requests
for an updated patch. Depending on the nature of the patch, we may either fix the outstanding issues on our own and
get another Kea developer to review them or the issue may end up in our Outstanding milestone. When a new
release is started, we go through the issues in Outstanding, select a small number of them and move them
to whatever the current milestone is. Keep that in mind if you plan to submit a patch and forget about it. We may
accept it eventually, but it's much, much faster process if you participate in it.
Once you make your patch available using one of the ways above, the action is on one of the Kea
developers. We need an issue. While we can create it on our own, we prefer the original submitter
fill them in as he or she has the best understanding of the purpose of the change and may have any
extra information about OS, version, why it was done this specific way etc. If there is no MR and no
gitlab issue, you risk the issue not showing up on ISC radars. Depending on the subjective
importance and urgency as perceived by the ISC engineer, the issue or PR will be assigned to one of
the milestones.
Sooner or later, one of Kea developers will do the review. Here's the tricky part. One of Kea
developers will review your patch, but it may not happen immediately. Unfortunately, developers are
usually working under a tight schedule, so any extra unplanned review work may take a while. Having
said that, we value external contributions very much and will do whatever we can to review patches
in a timely manner. Don't get discouraged if your patch is not accepted after first review. To keep
the code quality high, we use the same review processes for external patches as we do for internal
code. It may take some cycles of review/updated patch submissions before the code is finally
accepted. The nature of the review process is that it emphasizes areas that need improvement. If you
are not used to the review process, you may get the impression that the feedback is negative. It is
not: even the Kea developers seldom see reviews that say "All OK please merge".
Once the process is almost complete, the developer will likely ask you how you would like to be
credited. The typical answers are by first and last name, by nickname, by company name or
anonymously. Typically we will add a note to the ChangeLog and also set you as the author of the
commit applying the patch and update the contributors section in the AUTHORS file. If the
contributed feature is big or critical for whatever reason, it may also be mentioned in release
notes.
Sadly, we sometimes see patches that are submitted and then the submitter never responds to our
comments or requests for an updated patch. Depending on the nature of the patch, we may either fix
the outstanding issues on our own and get another Kea developer to review them or the issue may end
up in our Outstanding milestone. When a new release is started, we go through the issues in
Outstanding, select a small number of them and move them to whatever the current milestone is. Keep
that in mind if you plan to submit a patch and forget about it. We may accept it eventually, but
it's much, much faster process if you participate in it.
## Extra steps
If you are interested in knowing the results of more in-depth testing, you are welcome to visit the ISC Jenkins
page: https://jenkins.isc.org This is a live result page with all tests being run on various systems. Besides
basic unit-tests, we also have reports from valgrind (memory debugger), cppcheck and clang-analyzer (static code
analyzers), Lettuce system tests and more. Although it is not possible for non ISC employees to run tests on that
farm, it is possible that your contributed patch will end up there sooner or later. We also have ISC Forge tests
running, but currently the test results are not publicly available.
If you are interested in knowing the results of more in-depth testing, you are welcome to visit the
ISC Jenkins page: https://jenkins.isc.org This is a live result page with all tests being run on
various systems. Besides basic unit-tests, we also have reports from valgrind (memory debugger),
cppcheck and clang-analyzer (static code analyzers), Lettuce system tests and more. Although it is
not possible for non ISC employees to run tests on that farm, it is possible that your contributed
patch will end up there sooner or later. We also have ISC Forge tests running, but currently the
test results are not publicly available.
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment