-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Dotty internals docs update, dotty knowledge collection system integration #6786
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hello, and thank you for opening this PR! 🎉
All contributors have signed the CLA, thank you! ❤️
Commit Messages
We want to keep history, but for that to actually be useful we have
some rules on how to format our commit messages (relevant xkcd).
Please stick to these guidelines for commit messages:
- Separate subject from body with a blank line
- When fixing an issue, start your commit message with
Fix #<ISSUE-NBR>:
- Limit the subject line to 72 characters
- Capitalize the subject line
- Do not end the subject line with a period
- Use the imperative mood in the subject line ("Add" instead of "Added")
- Wrap the body at 80 characters
- Use the body to explain what and why vs. how
adapted from https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit
Have an awesome day! ☀️
Co-Authored-By: Guillaume Martres <[email protected]>
34db56b
to
2445bb2
Compare
This PR ports the knowledge from https://github.com/anatoliykmetyuk/dotty-cookbook to the official docs. Also, I've created https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty-knowledge where we can collect new knowledge (and also express intents with respect to e.g. modification of the knowledge base or flagging content as outdated). Also, this PR adds the following badge to this repo:
I did this to further reduce the overhead of knowledge collection so that the means to log your knowledge is highly visible and clear. However, this may create the risk of abuse by non-contributors using "Add Knowledge" feature to log user-side knowledge. I think this risk is acceptable and in line with the overall philosophy of deliberately not going for quality on the knowledge collection stage.
Comments and suggestions are welcome!