mirror of
https://we.phorge.it/source/phorge.git
synced 2024-12-24 06:20:56 +01:00
Write bug report, feature request and code contribution guides
Summary: Fixes T6347. This refines the "contributor guide" documents to basically lock down support further. Notable changes in policy: - Bugs: Emphasis on reproduction steps, strong emphasis on using Maniphest. Emphasis on what we support. - Features: Emphasis on describing problems instead of solutions, emphasis on realistic expecations about timelines. Strong emphasis on using Maniphest. - Code: Strong emphasis on coordinating with us first. No GitHub pull requests. Emphasis on us ignoring contributions we don't have time to deal with. Suggests local forks. Test Plan: Read these through; let me generate them and take some screenshots for easier reading. Reviewers: btrahan, chad Reviewed By: chad Subscribers: epriestley Maniphest Tasks: T6347 Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10764
This commit is contained in:
parent
18161d00a0
commit
853588af89
5 changed files with 619 additions and 64 deletions
|
@ -23,6 +23,9 @@
|
|||
"contrib" : {
|
||||
"name" : "Contributor Overview"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"detail": {
|
||||
"name" : "Contributing in Detail"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"standards" : {
|
||||
"name" : "Coding Standards"
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
|
159
src/docs/contributor/bug_reports.diviner
Normal file
159
src/docs/contributor/bug_reports.diviner
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
|
|||
@title Contributing Bug Reports
|
||||
@group detail
|
||||
|
||||
Describes how to file an effective Phabricator bug report.
|
||||
|
||||
Overview
|
||||
========
|
||||
|
||||
Found a bug with Phabricator? Let us know! This article describes how to file
|
||||
an effective bug report so we can get your issue fixed or help you work around
|
||||
it.
|
||||
|
||||
The most important things to do are:
|
||||
|
||||
- check the list of common fixes below;
|
||||
- make sure Phabricator is up to date;
|
||||
- make sure we support your setup;
|
||||
- explain how to reproduce the issue; and
|
||||
- create a task in
|
||||
[[ http://secure.phabricator.com/maniphest/task/create/ | Maniphest ]].
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this article walks through these points in detail.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a feature request (not a bug report), see
|
||||
@{article:Contributing Feature Requests} for a more tailored guide.
|
||||
|
||||
For general information on contributing to Phabricator, see
|
||||
@{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
||||
|
||||
Common Fixes
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
Before you file a report, here are some common solutions to problems:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Update Phabricator**: We receive a lot of bug reports about issues we have
|
||||
already fixed in HEAD. Updating often resolves issues. It is common for
|
||||
issues to be fixed in less than 24 hours, so even if you've updated recently
|
||||
you should update again. If you aren't sure how to update, see the next
|
||||
section.
|
||||
- **Update Libraries**: Make sure `libphutil/`, `arcanist/` and
|
||||
`phabricator/` are all up to date. Users often update `phabricator/` but
|
||||
forget to update `arcanist/` or `libphutil/`. When you update, make sure you
|
||||
update all three libraries.
|
||||
- **Restart Apache or PHP-FPM**: Phabricator uses caches which don't get
|
||||
reset until you restart Apache or PHP-FPM. After updating, make sure you
|
||||
restart.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Update Phabricator
|
||||
==================
|
||||
|
||||
Before filing a bug, make sure you are up to date. We receive many bug reports
|
||||
for issues we have already fixed, and even if we haven't fixed an issue we'll
|
||||
be able to resolve it more easily if you file a report based on HEAD. (For
|
||||
example, an old stack trace may not have the right line numbers, which will
|
||||
make it more difficult for us to figure out what's going wrong.)
|
||||
|
||||
To update Phabricator, use a script like this one:
|
||||
|
||||
http://www.phabricator.com/rsrc/install/update_phabricator.sh
|
||||
|
||||
This script will require some adjustments depending on how your setup is
|
||||
configured, which webserver you are using, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
**If you can not update** for some reason, please include the version of
|
||||
Phabricator you are running in your report. The version is just the Git hash
|
||||
of your local HEAD. You can find the version by running `git show` in
|
||||
`phabricator/` and copy/pasting the first line of output, or by browsing to
|
||||
{nav Config > All Settings} in the web UI and copy/pasting the information
|
||||
at the top.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Supported Issues
|
||||
================
|
||||
|
||||
Before filing a bug, make sure you're filing an issue against something we
|
||||
support.
|
||||
|
||||
**We do NOT support prototype applications.** If you're running into an issue
|
||||
with a prototype application, you're on your own. For more information about
|
||||
prototype applications, see @{article:User Guide: Prototype Applications}.
|
||||
|
||||
**We do NOT support third-party packages or instructions.** If you installed
|
||||
Phabricator (or configured some aspect of it) using a third-party package or by
|
||||
following a third-party guide (like a blog post), we can not help you.
|
||||
Phabricator changes quickly and third-party information is unreliable and often
|
||||
falls out of date. Contact the maintainer of the package or guide you used,
|
||||
or reinstall following the upstream instructions.
|
||||
|
||||
**We do NOT support custom code development or third-party libraries.** If
|
||||
you're writing an extension, you're on your own. We provide some documentation,
|
||||
but can not help you with extension or library development. If you downloaded a
|
||||
library from somewhere, contact the library maintainer.
|
||||
|
||||
**We do NOT support bizarre environments.** If your issue is specific to an
|
||||
unusual installation environment, we generally will not help you find a
|
||||
workaround. Install Phabricator in a normal environment instead. Examples of
|
||||
unusual environments are shared hosts, nontraditional hosts (gaming consoles,
|
||||
storage appliances), and hosts with unusually tight resource constraints. The
|
||||
vast majority of users run Phabricator in normal environments (modern computers
|
||||
with root access) and these are the only environments we support.
|
||||
|
||||
Otherwise, if you're having an issue with a supported first-party application
|
||||
and followed the upstream install instructions on a normal computer, we're happy
|
||||
to try to help.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reproducibility
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
The most important part of your report content is instructions on how to
|
||||
reproduce the issue. What did you do? If you do it again, does it still break?
|
||||
Does it depend on a specific browser? Can you reproduce the issue on
|
||||
`secure.phabricator.com`? Feel free to try to reproduce issues on the upstream
|
||||
install (which is kept near HEAD), within reason -- it's okay to make a few test
|
||||
objects if you're having trouble narrowing something down or want to check if
|
||||
updating might fix an issue.
|
||||
|
||||
It is nearly impossible for us to resolve many issues if we can not reproduce
|
||||
them. For more information, see @{article: Give Feedback! Get Support!}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Create a Task in Maniphest
|
||||
==========================
|
||||
|
||||
If you're up to date, supported, and have the best reproduction instructions
|
||||
you can come up with, you're ready to file an issue.
|
||||
|
||||
We'll look at any issue report we can find (we monitor IRC, email, GitHub,
|
||||
StackOverflow, Quora, Facebook and Twitter), but the upstream Maniphest is
|
||||
the authoritative bug tracker and the best place to file:
|
||||
|
||||
https://secure.phabricator.com/maniphest/task/create/
|
||||
|
||||
If you don't want to file there (or, for example, your bug relates to being
|
||||
unable to log in or unable to file an issue in Maniphest) you can file on any of
|
||||
the other channels, but we can address reports much more effectively if they're
|
||||
filed against the upstream than if they're filed somewhere else.
|
||||
|
||||
| Effectiveness | Filing Method |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| Best | Upstream Maniphest |
|
||||
| Okay | GitHub |
|
||||
| Ehhh | Quora, StackOverflow, Facebook, email, etc. |
|
||||
| What | Passive-aggressive tweet |
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a quick question or want to discuss something before filing an
|
||||
issue, IRC is a great way to get a sanity check first. You can find information
|
||||
about these channels in @{article: Give Feedback! Get Support!}.
|
||||
|
||||
Next Steps
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Continue by:
|
||||
|
||||
- learning about @{article: Contributing Feature Requests}; or
|
||||
- reading general support information in
|
||||
@{article: Give Feedback! Get Support!}; or
|
||||
- returning to the @{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
|
@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ contribute to Phabricator:
|
|||
things right away, but knowing about issues users are encountering or
|
||||
features they'd like to see improves our ability to plan and prioritize.
|
||||
For ways to do this, see @{article:Give Feedback! Get Support!}
|
||||
- For details on reporting bugs, see @{article:Contributing Bug Reports}.
|
||||
- For details on requesting features, see @{article:Contributing Feature
|
||||
Requests}.
|
||||
- Give us feedback on planned features. Most of what we'll build in the next
|
||||
6-12 months currently exists on the [[ Roadmap ]] or in Maniphest. Telling
|
||||
us about use cases you have can help us build better products when the time
|
||||
|
@ -53,70 +56,15 @@ contribute to Phabricator:
|
|||
@{article:Give Feedback! Get Support!}
|
||||
|
||||
If all of this sounds nice but you really just want to write some code, that's
|
||||
awesome too. The rest of this document (and the other articles in this section
|
||||
of the documentation) can help you get started.
|
||||
awesome too. To get started with contributing code, see
|
||||
@{article:Contributing Code}.
|
||||
|
||||
= Legal Stuff =
|
||||
Next Steps
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Before we can accept source code contributions, you need to submit a
|
||||
[[ https://secure.phabricator.com/L28 | Contributor License Agreement ]]. Your
|
||||
changes can not be accepted until you sign the agreement.
|
||||
Continue by:
|
||||
|
||||
If you haven't signed it by the time you send changes for review, you'll be
|
||||
reminded to sign it at that time.
|
||||
|
||||
If you're submitting work on behalf of a company (like your employer), the
|
||||
company can sign the [[ https://secure.phabricator.com/L30 | Corporate
|
||||
Contributor License Agreement ]] instead.
|
||||
|
||||
Both agreements are substantially similar to the Apache Foundation's CLAs. They
|
||||
protect Phacility and users of Phabricator by making sure we have permission to
|
||||
distribute your changes under an open source license.
|
||||
|
||||
= Not Sure Where To Get Started? =
|
||||
|
||||
Because we're usually quick to fix easy bugs and issues, we often don't have a
|
||||
very good backlog of starter tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
You can try searching in Maniphest for tasks tagged with "Easy", which might
|
||||
have something, but a lot of time this list is small and the tasks on it aren't
|
||||
very fun or interesting even if they aren't technically too difficult.
|
||||
|
||||
In general, the best way to contribute is to come to us with a problem you
|
||||
encountered or something you're interested in building, and then work with us
|
||||
to find a solution to it or a plan to build it. We can help turn a hacky patch
|
||||
into something that's upstreamable, and you'll get a fix or feature you want.
|
||||
|
||||
You can also look though the rest of the open tasks for something more
|
||||
substantive that you're interested in. This will give you a better chance of
|
||||
finding something that's relevant to you, but many tasks are large or blocked
|
||||
by other large tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
If you do find something, feel free to leave a comment like "I'm interested in
|
||||
working on this, is this something I could reasonably help with?". We're happy
|
||||
to walk through things, break larger tasks down into more detail, provide
|
||||
pointers to similar changes and the right places in the codebase to get started,
|
||||
and generally figure out how to attack a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
You can also just come find us in IRC and ask how to get started.
|
||||
|
||||
= Submitting Patches =
|
||||
|
||||
To submit patches against libphutil, Arcanist or Phabricator, create a commit
|
||||
and use `arc` to send it for review (probably with `epriestley` as a reviewer):
|
||||
|
||||
$ arc diff
|
||||
|
||||
You can also submit a pull request on GitHub, but Differential is strongly
|
||||
preferred.
|
||||
|
||||
= Suggested Reading =
|
||||
|
||||
You should read the relevant coding convention documents before you submit a
|
||||
change. If you're a new contributor, you don't need to worry about this too
|
||||
much. Just try to make your code look similar to the code around it, and we
|
||||
can help you through the details during review.
|
||||
|
||||
- @{article:General Coding Standards} (for all languages)
|
||||
- @{article:PHP Coding Standards} (for PHP)
|
||||
- @{article:Javascript Coding Standards} (for Javascript)
|
||||
- learning about bug reports in @{article:Contributing Bug Reports};
|
||||
- learning about feature requests in @{article:Contributing Feature Requests};
|
||||
- learning about code contributions in @{article:Contributing Code}; or
|
||||
- getting in touch with @{article:Give Feedback! Get Support!}
|
||||
|
|
256
src/docs/contributor/contributing_code.diviner
Normal file
256
src/docs/contributor/contributing_code.diviner
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,256 @@
|
|||
@title Contributing Code
|
||||
@group detail
|
||||
|
||||
Describes how to contribute code to Phabricator.
|
||||
|
||||
Overview
|
||||
========
|
||||
|
||||
If you're planning to send a patch to Phabricator, this guide can help you
|
||||
through the process. The most important parts of contributing code to
|
||||
Phabricator are:
|
||||
|
||||
- File a task with a bug report or feature request //before// you write code.
|
||||
- We rarely accept patches which we haven't discussed first.
|
||||
- We do not accept patches against prototype applications.
|
||||
- You must sign the CLA.
|
||||
- We do not accept GitHub pull requests.
|
||||
- Some alternative approaches are available if your change isn't something
|
||||
we want to bring upstream.
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this article describes these points in more detail, and then
|
||||
provides guidance on writing and submitting patches.
|
||||
|
||||
If you just want to contribute some code but don't have a specific bug or
|
||||
feature in mind, see the bottom of this document for tips on finding ways to get
|
||||
started.
|
||||
|
||||
For general information on contributing to Phabricator, see
|
||||
@{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Coordinate First
|
||||
================
|
||||
|
||||
Before sending code, you should file a bug report or feature request describing
|
||||
what you'd like to write. For details on how to do this, see these articles:
|
||||
|
||||
- @{article:Contributing Bug Reports}
|
||||
- @{article:Contributing Feature Requests}
|
||||
|
||||
When you file a task, mention that you'd like to write the code to fix it. We
|
||||
can help contextualize your request or bug and guide you through writing an
|
||||
upstreamable patch, provided it's something that's upstreamable. If it isn't
|
||||
upstreamable, we can let you know what the issues are and help find another
|
||||
plan of attack.
|
||||
|
||||
You don't have to file first (for example, if you spot a misspelling it's
|
||||
normally fine to just send a diff), but for anything even moderately complex
|
||||
you're strongly encouraged to file first and coordinate with the upstream.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Rejecting Patches
|
||||
=================
|
||||
|
||||
If you send us a patch without coordinating it with us first, it will probably
|
||||
be immediately rejected, or sit in limbo for a long time and eventually be
|
||||
rejected. The reasons we do this vary from patch to patch, but some of the most
|
||||
common reasons are:
|
||||
|
||||
**Unjustifiable Costs**: We support code in the upstream forever. Support is
|
||||
enormously expensive and takes up a huge amount of our time. The cost to support
|
||||
a change over its lifetime is often 10x or 100x or 1000x greater than the cost
|
||||
to write the first version of it. Many uncoordinated patches we receive are
|
||||
"white elephants", which would cost much more to maintain than the value they
|
||||
provide.
|
||||
|
||||
As an author, it may look like you're giving us free work and we're rejecting it
|
||||
as too expensive, but this viewpoint doesn't align with the reality of a large
|
||||
project which is actively supported by a small, experienced team. Writing code
|
||||
is cheap; maintaining it is expensive.
|
||||
|
||||
By coordinating with us first, you can make sure the patch is something we
|
||||
consider valuable enough to put long-term support resources behind, and that
|
||||
you're building it in a way that we're comfortable taking over.
|
||||
|
||||
**Not a Good Fit**: Many patches aren't good fits for the upstream: they
|
||||
implement features we simply don't want. You can find more information in
|
||||
@{article:Contributing Feature Requests}. Coordinating with us first helps
|
||||
make sure we're on the same page and interested in a feature.
|
||||
|
||||
The most common type of patch along these lines is a patch which adds new
|
||||
configuration options. We consider additional configuration options to have
|
||||
an exceptionally high lifetime support cost and are very unlikely to accept
|
||||
them. Coordinate with us first.
|
||||
|
||||
**Not a Priority**: If you send us a patch against something which isn't a
|
||||
priority, we probably won't have time to look at it. We don't give special
|
||||
treatment to low-priority issues just because there's code written: we'd still
|
||||
be spending time on something lower-priority when we could be spending it on
|
||||
something higher-priority instead.
|
||||
|
||||
If you coordinate with us first, you can make sure your patch is in an area
|
||||
of the codebase that we can prioritize.
|
||||
|
||||
**Overly Ambitious Patches**: Sometimes we'll get huge patches from new
|
||||
contributors. These can have a lot of fundamental problems and require a huge
|
||||
amount of our time to review and correct. If you're interested in contributing,
|
||||
you'll have more success if you start small and learn as you go.
|
||||
|
||||
We can help you break a large change into smaller pieces and learn how the
|
||||
codebase works as you proceed through the implementation, but only if you
|
||||
coordinate with us first.
|
||||
|
||||
**Generality**: We often receive several feature requests which ask for similar
|
||||
features, and can come up with a general approach which covers all of the use
|
||||
cases. If you send us a patch for //your use case only//, the approach may be
|
||||
too specific. When a cleaner and more general approach is available, we usually
|
||||
prefer to pursue it.
|
||||
|
||||
By coordinating with us first, we can make you aware of similar use cases and
|
||||
opportunities to generalize an approach. These changes are often small, but can
|
||||
have a big impact on how useful a piece of code is.
|
||||
|
||||
**Infrastructure and Sequencing**: Sometimes patches are written against a piece
|
||||
of infrastructure with major planned changes. We don't want to accept these
|
||||
because they'll make the infrastructure changes more difficult to implement.
|
||||
|
||||
Coordinate with us first to make sure a change doesn't need to wait on other
|
||||
pieces of infrastructure. We can help you identify technical blockers and
|
||||
possibly guide you through resolving them if you're interested.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
No Prototype Changes
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
With rare exceptions, we do not accept patches for prototype applications for
|
||||
the same reasons that we don't accept feature requests or bug reports. To learn
|
||||
more about prototype applications, see
|
||||
@{article:User Guide: Prototype Applications}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
You Must Sign the CLA
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
Before we can accept source code contributions, you need to submit a
|
||||
[[ https://secure.phabricator.com/L28 | Contributor License Agreement ]]. Your
|
||||
changes can not be accepted until you sign the agreement.
|
||||
|
||||
If you haven't signed it by the time you send changes for review, you'll be
|
||||
reminded to sign it at that time.
|
||||
|
||||
If you're submitting work on behalf of a company (like your employer), the
|
||||
company can sign the [[ https://secure.phabricator.com/L30 | Corporate
|
||||
Contributor License Agreement ]] instead.
|
||||
|
||||
Both agreements are substantially similar to the Apache Foundation's CLAs. They
|
||||
protect Phacility and users of Phabricator by making sure we have permission to
|
||||
distribute your changes under an open source license.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
No Pull Requests
|
||||
================
|
||||
|
||||
We do not accept pull requests on GitHub:
|
||||
|
||||
- We can not monitor who has signed CLAs on GitHub. You must sign the CLA
|
||||
to contribute, and we can't tell if you've signed it or not when you send
|
||||
us a pull request.
|
||||
- Pull requests do not get lint and unit tests run, so issues which are
|
||||
normally caught statically can slip by.
|
||||
- Phabricator is code review software, and developed using its own workflows.
|
||||
Pull requests bypass some of these workflows (for example, they will not
|
||||
trigger Herald rules to notify interested parties).
|
||||
- GitHub is not the authoritative master repository and we maintain a linear
|
||||
history, so merging pull requests is cumbersome on our end.
|
||||
- If you're comfortable enough with Phabricator to contribute to it, you
|
||||
should also be comfortable using it to submit changes.
|
||||
|
||||
Instead of sending a pull request, use `arc diff` to create a revision on the
|
||||
upstream install. Your change will go through the normal Phabricator review
|
||||
process.
|
||||
|
||||
(GitHub does not allow repositories to disable pull requests, which is why
|
||||
it's technically possible to submit them.)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
If you've written code but we're not accepting it into the upstream, some
|
||||
alternative approaches include:
|
||||
|
||||
**Maintain a local fork.** This will require some ongoing effort to port your
|
||||
changes forward when you update, but is often very reasonable for simple
|
||||
changes.
|
||||
|
||||
**Develop as an application.** Many parts of Phabricator's infrastructure are
|
||||
modular, and modularity is increasing over time. A lot of changes can be built
|
||||
as external modules or applications without forking Phabricator itself. There
|
||||
isn't much documentation or support for this right now, but you can look at
|
||||
how other applications are implemented, and at other third-party code that
|
||||
extends Phabricator.
|
||||
|
||||
**Rise to prominence.** We're more willing to accept borderline changes from
|
||||
community members who are active, make multiple contributions, or have a history
|
||||
with the project. This is not carte blanche, but distinguishing yourself can
|
||||
make us feel more comfortable about supporting a change which is slightly
|
||||
outside of our comfort zone.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Writing and Submitting Patches
|
||||
==================
|
||||
|
||||
To actually submit a patch, run `arc diff` in `phabricator/`, `arcanist/`, or
|
||||
`libphutil/`. When executed in these directories, `arc` should automatically
|
||||
talk to the upstream install. You can add `epriestley` as a reviewer.
|
||||
|
||||
You should read the relevant coding convention documents before you submit a
|
||||
change. If you're a new contributor, you don't need to worry about this too
|
||||
much. Just try to make your code look similar to the code around it, and we
|
||||
can help you through the details during review.
|
||||
|
||||
- @{article:General Coding Standards} (for all languages)
|
||||
- @{article:PHP Coding Standards} (for PHP)
|
||||
- @{article:Javascript Coding Standards} (for Javascript)
|
||||
|
||||
In general, if you're coordinating with us first, we can usually provide
|
||||
guidance on how to implement things. The other articles in this section also
|
||||
provide information on how to work in the Phabricator codebase.
|
||||
|
||||
Not Sure Where To Get Started?
|
||||
==============================
|
||||
|
||||
If you don't have a specific bug or feature in mind and just want to write
|
||||
some code, you can try to find something simple to get started with.
|
||||
|
||||
Because we're usually quick to fix easy bugs and issues, we often don't have a
|
||||
very good backlog of starter tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
You can try searching in Maniphest for tasks tagged with #easy, which might
|
||||
have something, but a lot of time this list is small and the tasks on it aren't
|
||||
very fun or interesting even if they aren't technically too difficult.
|
||||
|
||||
In general, the best way to contribute is to come to us with a problem you
|
||||
encountered or something you're interested in building, and then work with us
|
||||
to find a solution to it or a plan to build it. We can help turn a hacky patch
|
||||
into something that's upstreamable, and you'll get a fix or feature you want.
|
||||
|
||||
You can also look though the rest of the open tasks for something more
|
||||
substantive that you're interested in. This will give you a better chance of
|
||||
finding something that's relevant to you, but many tasks are large or blocked
|
||||
by other large tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
If you do find something, feel free to leave a comment like "I'm interested in
|
||||
working on this, is this something I could reasonably help with?". We're happy
|
||||
to walk through things, break larger tasks down into more detail, provide
|
||||
pointers to similar changes and the right places in the codebase to get started,
|
||||
and generally figure out how to attack a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Next Steps
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Continue by:
|
||||
|
||||
- returning to the @{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
189
src/docs/contributor/feature_requests.diviner
Normal file
189
src/docs/contributor/feature_requests.diviner
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
|
|||
@title Contributing Feature Requests
|
||||
@group detail
|
||||
|
||||
Describes how to file an effective Phabricator feature request.
|
||||
|
||||
Overview
|
||||
========
|
||||
|
||||
Have a feature you'd like to see in Phabricator? This article describes how
|
||||
to file an effective feature request.
|
||||
|
||||
The most important things to do are:
|
||||
|
||||
- understand the upstream;
|
||||
- make sure your feature makes sense in the project;
|
||||
- align your expectations around timelines and priorities;
|
||||
- describe your problem, not your solution; and
|
||||
- file a task in
|
||||
[[ http://secure.phabricator.com/maniphest/task/create/ | Maniphest ]].
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this article walks through these points in detail.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a bug report (not a feature request), see
|
||||
@{article:Contributing Bug Reports} for a more tailored guide.
|
||||
|
||||
For general information on contributing to Phabricator, see
|
||||
@{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Understanding the Upstream
|
||||
==========================
|
||||
|
||||
Before filing a feature request, it may be useful to understand how the
|
||||
upstream operates.
|
||||
|
||||
The Phabricator upstream is [[ https://www.phacility.com | Phacility, Inc ]].
|
||||
We maintain total control over the project and roadmap. There is no democratic
|
||||
process, voting, or community-driven decision making. This model is better
|
||||
at some things and worse at others than a more community-focused model would
|
||||
be, but it is the model we operate under.
|
||||
|
||||
We have a cohesive vision for the project in the long term, and a general
|
||||
roadmap that extends for years into the future. While the specifics of how
|
||||
we get there are flexible, many major milestones are well-established.
|
||||
|
||||
Although we set project direction, the community is also a critical part of
|
||||
Phabricator. We aren't all-knowing, and we rely on feedback to help us identify
|
||||
issues, guide product direction, prioritize changes, and suggest features.
|
||||
|
||||
Feature requests are an important part of this, but we ultimately build only
|
||||
features which make sense as part of the long term plan.
|
||||
|
||||
Since it's hard to absorb a detailed understanding of that vision, //describing
|
||||
a problem// is often more effective than //requesting a feature//. We have the
|
||||
context to develop solutions which fit into our plans, address similar use
|
||||
cases, make sense with the available infrastructure, and work within the
|
||||
boundaries of our product vision. For more details on this, see below.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Target Audiences
|
||||
================
|
||||
|
||||
Some feature requests support very unusual use cases. Although we are broadly
|
||||
inclusive of many different kinds of users and use cases, we are not trying
|
||||
to make the software all things to all users. Use cases which are far afield
|
||||
from the things the majority of users do with Phabricator often face substantial
|
||||
barriers.
|
||||
|
||||
Phabricator is primarily targeted at software projects and organizations with
|
||||
a heavy software focus. We are most likely to design, build, and prioritize
|
||||
features which serve these organizations and projects.
|
||||
|
||||
Phabricator is primarily targeted at software professionals and other
|
||||
professionals with adjacent responsibilities (like project management and
|
||||
operations). Particularly, we assume users are proficient computer users and
|
||||
familiar with software development concepts. We are most likely to design, build
|
||||
and prioritize features which serve these users.
|
||||
|
||||
Phabricator is primarily targeted at professionals working in teams on full-time
|
||||
projects. Particularly, we assume most users will use the software regularly and
|
||||
are often willing to spend a little more time up front to get a more efficient
|
||||
workflow in the long run. We are most likely to design, build and prioritize
|
||||
features which serve these use cases.
|
||||
|
||||
Phabricator is not limited to these kinds of organizations, users and use cases,
|
||||
but features which are aimed at a different group of users (like students,
|
||||
casual projects, or inexperienced computer users) may be harder to get
|
||||
upstreamed. Features aimed at very different groups of users (like wedding
|
||||
planners, book clubs, or dogs) will be much harder to get upstreamed.
|
||||
|
||||
In many cases, a feature makes something better for all users. For example,
|
||||
suppose we fixed an issue where colorblind users had difficulty doing something.
|
||||
Dogs would benefit the most, but colorblind human users would also benefit, and
|
||||
no one would be worse off. If the benefit for core users is very small these
|
||||
kinds of features may be hard to prioritize, but there is no exceptional barrier
|
||||
to getting them upstreamed.
|
||||
|
||||
In other cases, a feature makes something better for some users and worse for
|
||||
other users. These kinds of features face a high barrier if they make the
|
||||
software better at planning weddings and worse at reviewing code.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Setting Expectations
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
We have a lot of users and a small team. Even if your feature is something we're
|
||||
interested in and a good fit for where we want the product to go, it may take
|
||||
us a long time to get around to building it.
|
||||
|
||||
We work full time on Phabricator, and our long-term roadmap has many years worth
|
||||
of work. Your feature request is competing against thousands of other requests
|
||||
for priority.
|
||||
|
||||
In general, we try to prioritize work that will have the greatest impact on the
|
||||
most users. Many feature requests are perfectly reasonable requests, but have
|
||||
very little impact, impact only a few users, and/or are complex to develop and
|
||||
support relative to their impact. It can take us a long time to get to these.
|
||||
|
||||
Even if your feature request is simple and has substantial impact for a large
|
||||
number of users, the size of the request queue means that it is mathematically
|
||||
unlikely to be near the top.
|
||||
|
||||
You can find some information about how we prioritize in T4778. In particular,
|
||||
we reprioritize frequently and can not accurately predict when we'll build a
|
||||
feature which isn't very near to top of the queue.
|
||||
|
||||
As a whole, this means that the overwhelming majority of feature requests will
|
||||
sit in queue for a long time without any updates, and that we won't be able to
|
||||
give you any updates or predictions about timelines. One day, out of nowhere,
|
||||
your feature will materialize. That day may be a decade from now. You should
|
||||
have realistic expectations about this when filing a feature request.
|
||||
|
||||
If you want a concrete timeline, you can build the feature yourself. See
|
||||
@{article:Contributing Code} for details and alternatives to working with the
|
||||
upstream.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Describe Problems
|
||||
=================
|
||||
|
||||
When you file a feature request, it is really helpful to describe the problem
|
||||
you're facing first, not just your desired solution.
|
||||
|
||||
Often, your problem may have a lot in common with other similar problems. If we
|
||||
understand your use case we can compare it to other use cases and sometimes find
|
||||
a more powerful or more general solution which solves several problems at once.
|
||||
|
||||
At other times, we'll have a planned solution to the problem that might be
|
||||
different from your desired solution but accomplish the same goal. Understanding
|
||||
the root issue can let us merge and contextualize things.
|
||||
|
||||
Sometimes there's already a way to solve your problem that might just not be
|
||||
obvious.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, your proposed solution may not be compatible with the direction we
|
||||
want to take the product, but we may be able to come up with another solution
|
||||
which has approximately the same effect and does fit into the product direction.
|
||||
|
||||
If you only describe the solution and not the problem, we can't generalize,
|
||||
contextualize, merge, reframe, or offer alternative solutions or workarounds.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Create a Task in Maniphest
|
||||
==========================
|
||||
|
||||
If you think your feature might be a good fit for the upstream, have reasonable
|
||||
expectations about it, and have a good description of the problem you're trying
|
||||
to solve, you're ready to file a feature request:
|
||||
|
||||
https://secure.phabricator.com/maniphest/task/create/
|
||||
|
||||
You can file feature requests in places other than Maniphest (like GitHub), but
|
||||
we can address them far more effectively if you file them in the upstream.
|
||||
Feature requests filed elsewhere will generally be moved to the upstream.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a quick question or want to discuss something before filing a
|
||||
request, IRC is a great way to get a quick answer. You can find information
|
||||
about IRC and other support channels in @{article: Give Feedback! Get Support!}.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Next Steps
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Continue by:
|
||||
|
||||
- learning about @{article: Contributing Bug Reports}; or
|
||||
- reading general support information in
|
||||
@{article: Give Feedback! Get Support!}; or
|
||||
- returning to the @{article:Contributor Introduction}.
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue