|
@@ -1,384 +0,0 @@
|
|
|
-<!-- use this template to generate the contributor docs with the following command: `$ lingo run docs --template CONTRIBUTING_TEMPLATE.md --output CONTRIBUTING.md` -->
|
|
|
|
|
-# Contributing to excelize
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Want to hack on excelize? Awesome! This page contains information about reporting issues as well as some tips and
|
|
|
|
|
-guidelines useful to experienced open source contributors. Finally, make sure
|
|
|
|
|
-you read our [community guidelines](#community-guidelines) before you
|
|
|
|
|
-start participating.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Topics
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* [Reporting Security Issues](#reporting-security-issues)
|
|
|
|
|
-* [Design and Cleanup Proposals](#design-and-cleanup-proposals)
|
|
|
|
|
-* [Reporting Issues](#reporting-other-issues)
|
|
|
|
|
-* [Quick Contribution Tips and Guidelines](#quick-contribution-tips-and-guidelines)
|
|
|
|
|
-* [Community Guidelines](#community-guidelines)
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Reporting security issues
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-The excelize maintainers take security seriously. If you discover a security
|
|
|
|
|
-issue, please bring it to their attention right away!
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Please **DO NOT** file a public issue, instead send your report privately to
|
|
|
|
|
-[xuri.me](https://xuri.me).
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Security reports are greatly appreciated and we will publicly thank you for it.
|
|
|
|
|
-We currently do not offer a paid security bounty program, but are not
|
|
|
|
|
-ruling it out in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Reporting other issues
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-A great way to contribute to the project is to send a detailed report when you
|
|
|
|
|
-encounter an issue. We always appreciate a well-written, thorough bug report,
|
|
|
|
|
-and will thank you for it!
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Check that [our issue database](https://github.com/360EntSecGroup-Skylar/excelize/issues)
|
|
|
|
|
-doesn't already include that problem or suggestion before submitting an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
-If you find a match, you can use the "subscribe" button to get notified on
|
|
|
|
|
-updates. Do *not* leave random "+1" or "I have this too" comments, as they
|
|
|
|
|
-only clutter the discussion, and don't help resolving it. However, if you
|
|
|
|
|
-have ways to reproduce the issue or have additional information that may help
|
|
|
|
|
-resolving the issue, please leave a comment.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-When reporting issues, always include the output of `go env`.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Also include the steps required to reproduce the problem if possible and
|
|
|
|
|
-applicable. This information will help us review and fix your issue faster.
|
|
|
|
|
-When sending lengthy log-files, consider posting them as a gist [https://gist.github.com](https://gist.github.com).
|
|
|
|
|
-Don't forget to remove sensitive data from your logfiles before posting (you can
|
|
|
|
|
-replace those parts with "REDACTED").
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Quick contribution tips and guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-This section gives the experienced contributor some tips and guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Pull requests are always welcome
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Not sure if that typo is worth a pull request? Found a bug and know how to fix
|
|
|
|
|
-it? Do it! We will appreciate it. Any significant improvement should be
|
|
|
|
|
-documented as [a GitHub issue](https://github.com/360EntSecGroup-Skylar/excelize/issues) before
|
|
|
|
|
-anybody starts working on it.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-We are always thrilled to receive pull requests. We do our best to process them
|
|
|
|
|
-quickly. If your pull request is not accepted on the first try,
|
|
|
|
|
-don't get discouraged!
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Design and cleanup proposals
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-You can propose new designs for existing excelize features. You can also design
|
|
|
|
|
-entirely new features. We really appreciate contributors who want to refactor or
|
|
|
|
|
-otherwise cleanup our project.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-We try hard to keep excelize lean and focused. Excelize can't do everything for
|
|
|
|
|
-everybody. This means that we might decide against incorporating a new feature.
|
|
|
|
|
-However, there might be a way to implement that feature *on top of* excelize.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Conventions
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Fork the repository and make changes on your fork in a feature branch:
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* If it's a bug fix branch, name it XXXX-something where XXXX is the number of
|
|
|
|
|
- the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
-* If it's a feature branch, create an enhancement issue to announce
|
|
|
|
|
- your intentions, and name it XXXX-something where XXXX is the number of the
|
|
|
|
|
- issue.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Submit unit tests for your changes. Go has a great test framework built in; use
|
|
|
|
|
-it! Take a look at existing tests for inspiration. Run the full test on your branch before
|
|
|
|
|
-submitting a pull request.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Update the documentation when creating or modifying features. Test your
|
|
|
|
|
-documentation changes for clarity, concision, and correctness, as well as a
|
|
|
|
|
-clean documentation build.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Write clean code. Universally formatted code promotes ease of writing, reading,
|
|
|
|
|
-and maintenance. Always run `gofmt -s -w file.go` on each changed file before
|
|
|
|
|
-committing your changes. Most editors have plug-ins that do this automatically.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Pull request descriptions should be as clear as possible and include a reference
|
|
|
|
|
-to all the issues that they address.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Successful Changes
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Before contributing large or high impact changes, make the effort to coordinate
|
|
|
|
|
-with the maintainers of the project before submitting a pull request. This
|
|
|
|
|
-prevents you from doing extra work that may or may not be merged.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Large PRs that are just submitted without any prior communication are unlikely
|
|
|
|
|
-to be successful.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-While pull requests are the methodology for submitting changes to code, changes
|
|
|
|
|
-are much more likely to be accepted if they are accompanied by additional
|
|
|
|
|
-engineering work. While we don't define this explicitly, most of these goals
|
|
|
|
|
-are accomplished through communication of the design goals and subsequent
|
|
|
|
|
-solutions. Often times, it helps to first state the problem before presenting
|
|
|
|
|
-solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Typically, the best methods of accomplishing this are to submit an issue,
|
|
|
|
|
-stating the problem. This issue can include a problem statement and a
|
|
|
|
|
-checklist with requirements. If solutions are proposed, alternatives should be
|
|
|
|
|
-listed and eliminated. Even if the criteria for elimination of a solution is
|
|
|
|
|
-frivolous, say so.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Larger changes typically work best with design documents. These are focused on
|
|
|
|
|
-providing context to the design at the time the feature was conceived and can
|
|
|
|
|
-inform future documentation contributions.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Commit Messages
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Commit messages must start with a capitalized and short summary
|
|
|
|
|
-written in the imperative, followed by an optional, more detailed explanatory
|
|
|
|
|
-text which is separated from the summary by an empty line.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Commit messages should follow best practices, including explaining the context
|
|
|
|
|
-of the problem and how it was solved, including in caveats or follow up changes
|
|
|
|
|
-required. They should tell the story of the change and provide readers
|
|
|
|
|
-understanding of what led to it.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-In practice, the best approach to maintaining a nice commit message is to
|
|
|
|
|
-leverage a `git add -p` and `git commit --amend` to formulate a solid
|
|
|
|
|
-changeset. This allows one to piece together a change, as information becomes
|
|
|
|
|
-available.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-If you squash a series of commits, don't just submit that. Re-write the commit
|
|
|
|
|
-message, as if the series of commits was a single stroke of brilliance.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-That said, there is no requirement to have a single commit for a PR, as long as
|
|
|
|
|
-each commit tells the story. For example, if there is a feature that requires a
|
|
|
|
|
-package, it might make sense to have the package in a separate commit then have
|
|
|
|
|
-a subsequent commit that uses it.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Remember, you're telling part of the story with the commit message. Don't make
|
|
|
|
|
-your chapter weird.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Review
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Code review comments may be added to your pull request. Discuss, then make the
|
|
|
|
|
-suggested modifications and push additional commits to your feature branch. Post
|
|
|
|
|
-a comment after pushing. New commits show up in the pull request automatically,
|
|
|
|
|
-but the reviewers are notified only when you comment.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Pull requests must be cleanly rebased on top of master without multiple branches
|
|
|
|
|
-mixed into the PR.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-**Git tip**: If your PR no longer merges cleanly, use `rebase master` in your
|
|
|
|
|
-feature branch to update your pull request rather than `merge master`.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Before you make a pull request, squash your commits into logical units of work
|
|
|
|
|
-using `git rebase -i` and `git push -f`. A logical unit of work is a consistent
|
|
|
|
|
-set of patches that should be reviewed together: for example, upgrading the
|
|
|
|
|
-version of a vendored dependency and taking advantage of its now available new
|
|
|
|
|
-feature constitute two separate units of work. Implementing a new function and
|
|
|
|
|
-calling it in another file constitute a single logical unit of work. The very
|
|
|
|
|
-high majority of submissions should have a single commit, so if in doubt: squash
|
|
|
|
|
-down to one.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-After every commit, make sure the test passes. Include documentation
|
|
|
|
|
-changes in the same pull request so that a revert would remove all traces of
|
|
|
|
|
-the feature or fix.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Include an issue reference like `Closes #XXXX` or `Fixes #XXXX` in commits that
|
|
|
|
|
-close an issue. Including references automatically closes the issue on a merge.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Please see the [Coding Style](#coding-style) for further guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Merge approval
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-The excelize maintainers use LGTM (Looks Good To Me) in comments on the code review to
|
|
|
|
|
-indicate acceptance.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Sign your work
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for the patch. Your
|
|
|
|
|
-signature certifies that you wrote the patch or otherwise have the right to pass
|
|
|
|
|
-it on as an open-source patch. The rules are pretty simple: if you can certify
|
|
|
|
|
-the below (from [developercertificate.org](http://developercertificate.org/)):
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-```text
|
|
|
|
|
-Developer Certificate of Origin
|
|
|
|
|
-Version 1.1
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
-1 Letterman Drive
|
|
|
|
|
-Suite D4700
|
|
|
|
|
-San Francisco, CA, 94129
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
|
|
|
|
|
-license document, but changing it is not allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
|
|
|
|
|
- have the right to submit it under the open source license
|
|
|
|
|
- indicated in the file; or
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
|
|
|
|
|
- of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
|
|
|
|
|
- license and I have the right under that license to submit that
|
|
|
|
|
- work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
|
|
|
|
|
- by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
|
|
|
|
|
- permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
|
|
|
|
|
- in the file; or
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
|
|
|
|
|
- person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
|
|
|
|
|
- it.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
|
|
|
|
|
- are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
|
|
|
|
|
- personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
|
|
|
|
|
- maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
|
|
|
|
|
- this project or the open source license(s) involved.
|
|
|
|
|
-```
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Then you just add a line to every git commit message:
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
- Signed-off-by: Ri Xu https://xuri.me
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Use your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-If you set your `user.name` and `user.email` git configs, you can sign your
|
|
|
|
|
-commit automatically with `git commit -s`.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### How can I become a maintainer
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-First, all maintainers have 3 things
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* They share responsibility in the project's success.
|
|
|
|
|
-* They have made a long-term, recurring time investment to improve the project.
|
|
|
|
|
-* They spend that time doing whatever needs to be done, not necessarily what
|
|
|
|
|
- is the most interesting or fun.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Maintainers are often under-appreciated, because their work is harder to appreciate.
|
|
|
|
|
-It's easy to appreciate a really cool and technically advanced feature. It's harder
|
|
|
|
|
-to appreciate the absence of bugs, the slow but steady improvement in stability,
|
|
|
|
|
-or the reliability of a release process. But those things distinguish a good
|
|
|
|
|
-project from a great one.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Don't forget: being a maintainer is a time investment. Make sure you
|
|
|
|
|
-will have time to make yourself available. You don't have to be a
|
|
|
|
|
-maintainer to make a difference on the project!
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-If you want to become a meintainer, contact [xuri.me](https://xuri.me) and given a introduction of you.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Community guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-We want to keep the community awesome, growing and collaborative. We need
|
|
|
|
|
-your help to keep it that way. To help with this we've come up with some general
|
|
|
|
|
-guidelines for the community as a whole:
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Be nice: Be courteous, respectful and polite to fellow community members:
|
|
|
|
|
- no regional, racial, gender, or other abuse will be tolerated. We like
|
|
|
|
|
- nice people way better than mean ones!
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Encourage diversity and participation: Make everyone in our community feel
|
|
|
|
|
- welcome, regardless of their background and the extent of their
|
|
|
|
|
- contributions, and do everything possible to encourage participation in
|
|
|
|
|
- our community.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Keep it legal: Basically, don't get us in trouble. Share only content that
|
|
|
|
|
- you own, do not share private or sensitive information, and don't break
|
|
|
|
|
- the law.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Stay on topic: Make sure that you are posting to the correct channel and
|
|
|
|
|
- avoid off-topic discussions. Remember when you update an issue or respond
|
|
|
|
|
- to an email you are potentially sending to a large number of people. Please
|
|
|
|
|
- consider this before you update. Also remember that nobody likes spam.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Don't send email to the maintainers: There's no need to send email to the
|
|
|
|
|
- maintainers to ask them to investigate an issue or to take a look at a
|
|
|
|
|
- pull request. Instead of sending an email, GitHub mentions should be
|
|
|
|
|
- used to ping maintainers to review a pull request, a proposal or an
|
|
|
|
|
- issue.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-### Guideline violations — 3 strikes method
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-The point of this section is not to find opportunities to punish people, but we
|
|
|
|
|
-do need a fair way to deal with people who are making our community suck.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-1. First occurrence: We'll give you a friendly, but public reminder that the
|
|
|
|
|
- behavior is inappropriate according to our guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-2. Second occurrence: We will send you a private message with a warning that
|
|
|
|
|
- any additional violations will result in removal from the community.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-3. Third occurrence: Depending on the violation, we may need to delete or ban
|
|
|
|
|
- your account.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-**Notes:**
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Obvious spammers are banned on first occurrence. If we don't do this, we'll
|
|
|
|
|
- have spam all over the place.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Violations are forgiven after 6 months of good behavior, and we won't hold a
|
|
|
|
|
- grudge.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* People who commit minor infractions will get some education, rather than
|
|
|
|
|
- hammering them in the 3 strikes process.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* The rules apply equally to everyone in the community, no matter how much
|
|
|
|
|
- you've contributed.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Extreme violations of a threatening, abusive, destructive or illegal nature
|
|
|
|
|
- will be addressed immediately and are not subject to 3 strikes or forgiveness.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-* Contact [xuri.me](https://xuri.me) to report abuse or appeal violations. In the case of
|
|
|
|
|
- appeals, we know that mistakes happen, and we'll work with you to come up with a
|
|
|
|
|
- fair solution if there has been a misunderstanding.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Coding Style
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-Unless explicitly stated, we follow all coding guidelines from the Go
|
|
|
|
|
-community. While some of these standards may seem arbitrary, they somehow seem
|
|
|
|
|
-to result in a solid, consistent codebase.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-It is possible that the code base does not currently comply with these
|
|
|
|
|
-guidelines. We are not looking for a massive PR that fixes this, since that
|
|
|
|
|
-goes against the spirit of the guidelines. All new contributions should make a
|
|
|
|
|
-best effort to clean up and make the code base better than they left it.
|
|
|
|
|
-Obviously, apply your best judgement. Remember, the goal here is to make the
|
|
|
|
|
-code base easier for humans to navigate and understand. Always keep that in
|
|
|
|
|
-mind when nudging others to comply.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-The rules:
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-1. All code should be formatted with `gofmt -s`.
|
|
|
|
|
-2. All code should pass the default levels of
|
|
|
|
|
- [`golint`](https://github.com/golang/lint).
|
|
|
|
|
-3. All code should follow the guidelines covered in [Effective
|
|
|
|
|
- Go](http://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html) and [Go Code Review
|
|
|
|
|
- Comments](https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments).
|
|
|
|
|
-4. Comment the code. Tell us the why, the history and the context.
|
|
|
|
|
-5. Document _all_ declarations and methods, even private ones. Declare
|
|
|
|
|
- expectations, caveats and anything else that may be important. If a type
|
|
|
|
|
- gets exported, having the comments already there will ensure it's ready.
|
|
|
|
|
-6. Variable name length should be proportional to its context and no longer.
|
|
|
|
|
- `noCommaALongVariableNameLikeThisIsNotMoreClearWhenASimpleCommentWouldDo`.
|
|
|
|
|
- In practice, short methods will have short variable names and globals will
|
|
|
|
|
- have longer names.
|
|
|
|
|
-7. No underscores in package names. If you need a compound name, step back,
|
|
|
|
|
- and re-examine why you need a compound name. If you still think you need a
|
|
|
|
|
- compound name, lose the underscore.
|
|
|
|
|
-8. No utils or helpers packages. If a function is not general enough to
|
|
|
|
|
- warrant its own package, it has not been written generally enough to be a
|
|
|
|
|
- part of a util package. Just leave it unexported and well-documented.
|
|
|
|
|
-9. All tests should run with `go test` and outside tooling should not be
|
|
|
|
|
- required. No, we don't need another unit testing framework. Assertion
|
|
|
|
|
- packages are acceptable if they provide _real_ incremental value.
|
|
|
|
|
-10. Even though we call these "rules" above, they are actually just
|
|
|
|
|
- guidelines. Since you've read all the rules, you now know that.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-If you are having trouble getting into the mood of idiomatic Go, we recommend
|
|
|
|
|
-reading through [Effective Go](https://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html). The
|
|
|
|
|
-[Go Blog](https://blog.golang.org) is also a great resource. Drinking the
|
|
|
|
|
-kool-aid is a lot easier than going thirsty.
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-## Code Review Comments and Effective Go Guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
-[CodeLingo](https://codelingo.io) automatically checks every pull request against the following guidelines from [Effective Go](https://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html) and [Code Review Comments](https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments).
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-{{range .}}
|
|
|
|
|
-### {{.title}}
|
|
|
|
|
-{{.body}}
|
|
|
|
|
-{{end}}
|
|
|