|
|
# Contributing Guidelines
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Helm project accepts contributions via GitHub pull requests. This document outlines the process
|
|
|
to help get your contribution accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Reporting a Security Issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of the time, when you find a bug in Helm, it should be reported using [GitHub
|
|
|
issues](https://github.com/helm/helm/issues). However, if you are reporting a _security
|
|
|
vulnerability_, please email a report to
|
|
|
[cncf-helm-security@lists.cncf.io](mailto:cncf-helm-security@lists.cncf.io). This will give us a
|
|
|
chance to try to fix the issue before it is exploited in the wild.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Sign Your Work
|
|
|
|
|
|
The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for a commit. All commits need to be
|
|
|
signed. Your signature certifies that you wrote the patch or otherwise have the right to contribute
|
|
|
the material. The rules are pretty simple, if you can certify the below (from
|
|
|
[developercertificate.org](https://developercertificate.org/)):
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
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: Joe Smith <joe.smith@example.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
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`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: If your git config information is set properly then viewing the `git log` information for your
|
|
|
commit will look something like this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
Author: Joe Smith <joe.smith@example.com>
|
|
|
Date: Thu Feb 2 11:41:15 2018 -0800
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update README
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@example.com>
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notice the `Author` and `Signed-off-by` lines match. If they don't your PR will be rejected by the
|
|
|
automated DCO check.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Support Channels
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whether you are a user or contributor, official support channels include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
- [Issues](https://github.com/helm/helm/issues)
|
|
|
- Slack:
|
|
|
- User: [#helm-users](https://kubernetes.slack.com/messages/C0NH30761/details/)
|
|
|
- Contributor: [#helm-dev](https://kubernetes.slack.com/messages/C51E88VDG/)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before opening a new issue or submitting a new pull request, it's helpful to search the project -
|
|
|
it's likely that another user has already reported the issue you're facing, or it's a known issue
|
|
|
that we're already aware of. It is also worth asking on the Slack channels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Milestones
|
|
|
|
|
|
We use milestones to track progress of specific planned releases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, if the latest currently-released version is `3.2.1`, an issue/PR which pertains to a
|
|
|
specific upcoming bugfix or feature release could fall into one of two different active milestones:
|
|
|
`3.2.2` or `3.3.0`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issues and PRs which are deemed backwards-incompatible may be added to the discussion items for
|
|
|
Helm 4 with [label:v4.x](https://github.com/helm/helm/labels/v4.x). An issue or PR that we are not
|
|
|
sure we will be addressing will not be added to any milestone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A milestone (and hence release) can be closed when all outstanding issues/PRs have been closed
|
|
|
or moved to another milestone and the associated release has been published.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Semantic Versioning
|
|
|
|
|
|
Helm maintains a strong commitment to backward compatibility. All of our changes to protocols and
|
|
|
formats are backward compatible from one major release to the next. No features, flags, or commands
|
|
|
are removed or substantially modified (unless we need to fix a security issue).
|
|
|
|
|
|
We also remain committed to not changing publicly accessible Go library definitions inside of the `pkg/` directory of our source code in a non-backwards-compatible way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more details on Helm’s minor and patch release backwards-compatibility rules, please read [HIP-0004](https://github.com/helm/community/blob/main/hips/hip-0004.md)
|
|
|
|
|
|
For a quick summary of our backward compatibility guidelines for releases between 3.0 and 4.0:
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Command line commands, flags, and arguments MUST be backward compatible
|
|
|
- File formats (such as Chart.yaml) MUST be backward compatible
|
|
|
- Any chart that worked on a previous version of Helm 3 MUST work on a new version of Helm 3
|
|
|
(barring the cases where (a) Kubernetes itself changed, and (b) the chart worked because it
|
|
|
exploited a bug)
|
|
|
- Chart repository functionality MUST be backward compatible
|
|
|
- Go libraries inside of `pkg/` MUST remain backward compatible, though code inside of `cmd/` and
|
|
|
`internal/` may be changed from release to release without notice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issues are used as the primary method for tracking anything to do with the Helm project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Issue Types
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are 5 types of issues (each with their own corresponding [label](#labels)):
|
|
|
|
|
|
- `question/support`: These are support or functionality inquiries that we want to have a record of
|
|
|
for future reference. Generally these are questions that are too complex or large to store in the
|
|
|
Slack channel or have particular interest to the community as a whole. Depending on the
|
|
|
discussion, these can turn into `feature` or `bug` issues.
|
|
|
- `proposal`: Used for items (like this one) that propose a new ideas or functionality that require
|
|
|
a larger community discussion. This allows for feedback from others in the community before a
|
|
|
feature is actually developed. This is not needed for small additions. Final word on whether or
|
|
|
not a feature needs a proposal is up to the core maintainers. All issues that are proposals should
|
|
|
both have a label and an issue title of "Proposal: [the rest of the title]." A proposal can become
|
|
|
a `feature` and does not require a milestone.
|
|
|
- `feature`: These track specific feature requests and ideas until they are complete. They can
|
|
|
evolve from a `proposal` or can be submitted individually depending on the size.
|
|
|
- `bug`: These track bugs with the code
|
|
|
- `docs`: These track problems with the documentation (i.e. missing or incomplete)
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Issue Lifecycle
|
|
|
|
|
|
The issue lifecycle is mainly driven by the core maintainers, but is good information for those
|
|
|
contributing to Helm. All issue types follow the same general lifecycle. Differences are noted
|
|
|
below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Issue creation
|
|
|
2. Triage
|
|
|
- The maintainer in charge of triaging will apply the proper labels for the issue. This includes
|
|
|
labels for priority, type, and metadata (such as `good first issue`). The only issue priority
|
|
|
we will be tracking is whether or not the issue is "critical." If additional levels are needed
|
|
|
in the future, we will add them.
|
|
|
- (If needed) Clean up the title to succinctly and clearly state the issue. Also ensure that
|
|
|
proposals are prefaced with "Proposal: [the rest of the title]".
|
|
|
- Add the issue to the correct milestone. If any questions come up, don't worry about adding the
|
|
|
issue to a milestone until the questions are answered.
|
|
|
- We attempt to do this process at least once per work day.
|
|
|
3. Discussion
|
|
|
- Issues that are labeled `feature` or `proposal` must write a Helm Improvement Proposal (HIP).
|
|
|
See [Proposing an Idea](#proposing-an-idea). Smaller quality-of-life enhancements are exempt.
|
|
|
- Issues that are labeled as `feature` or `bug` should be connected to the PR that resolves it.
|
|
|
- Whoever is working on a `feature` or `bug` issue (whether a maintainer or someone from the
|
|
|
community), should either assign the issue to themselves or make a comment in the issue saying
|
|
|
that they are taking it.
|
|
|
- `proposal` and `support/question` issues should stay open until resolved or if they have not
|
|
|
been active for more than 30 days. This will help keep the issue queue to a manageable size
|
|
|
and reduce noise. Should the issue need to stay open, the `keep open` label can be added.
|
|
|
4. Issue closure
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Proposing an Idea
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before proposing a new idea to the Helm project, please make sure to write up a [Helm Improvement
|
|
|
Proposal](https://github.com/helm/community/tree/master/hips). A Helm Improvement Proposal is a
|
|
|
design document that describes a new feature for the Helm project. The proposal should provide a
|
|
|
concise technical specification and rationale for the feature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is also worth considering vetting your idea with the community via the
|
|
|
[cncf-helm](mailto:cncf-helm@lists.cncf.io) mailing list. Vetting an idea publicly before going as
|
|
|
far as writing a proposal is meant to save the potential author time. Many ideas have been proposed;
|
|
|
it's quite likely there are others in the community who may be working on a similar proposal, or a
|
|
|
similar proposal may have already been written.
|
|
|
|
|
|
HIPs are submitted to the [helm/community repository](https://github.com/helm/community). [HIP
|
|
|
1](https://github.com/helm/community/blob/master/hips/hip-0001.md) describes the process to write a
|
|
|
HIP as well as the review process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
After your proposal has been approved, follow the [developer's
|
|
|
guide](https://helm.sh/docs/community/developers/) to get started.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## How to Contribute a Patch
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Identify or create the related issue. If you're proposing a larger change to
|
|
|
Helm, see [Proposing an Idea](#proposing-an-idea).
|
|
|
2. Fork the desired repo; develop and test your code changes.
|
|
|
3. Submit a pull request, making sure to sign your work and link the related issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coding conventions and standards are explained in the [official developer
|
|
|
docs](https://helm.sh/docs/developers/).
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like any good open source project, we use Pull Requests (PRs) to track code changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
### PR Lifecycle
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. PR creation
|
|
|
- PRs are usually created to fix or else be a subset of other PRs that fix a particular issue.
|
|
|
- We more than welcome PRs that are currently in progress. They are a great way to keep track of
|
|
|
important work that is in-flight, but useful for others to see. If a PR is a work in progress,
|
|
|
it **must** be prefaced with "WIP: [title]". Once the PR is ready for review, remove "WIP"
|
|
|
from the title.
|
|
|
- It is preferred, but not required, to have a PR tied to a specific issue. There can be
|
|
|
circumstances where if it is a quick fix then an issue might be overkill. The details provided
|
|
|
in the PR description would suffice in this case.
|
|
|
2. Triage
|
|
|
- The maintainer in charge of triaging will apply the proper labels for the issue. This should
|
|
|
include at least a size label, `bug` or `feature`, and `awaiting review` once all labels are
|
|
|
applied. See the [Labels section](#labels) for full details on the definitions of labels.
|
|
|
- Add the PR to the correct milestone. This should be the same as the issue the PR closes.
|
|
|
3. Assigning reviews
|
|
|
- Once a review has the `awaiting review` label, maintainers will review them as schedule
|
|
|
permits. The maintainer who takes the issue should self-request a review.
|
|
|
- PRs from a community member with the label `size/S` or larger requires 2 review approvals from
|
|
|
maintainers before it can be merged. Those with `size/XS` are per the judgement of the
|
|
|
maintainers. For more detail see the [Size Labels](#size-labels) section.
|
|
|
4. Reviewing/Discussion
|
|
|
- All reviews will be completed using GitHub review tool.
|
|
|
- A "Comment" review should be used when there are questions about the code that should be
|
|
|
answered, but that don't involve code changes. This type of review does not count as approval.
|
|
|
- A "Changes Requested" review indicates that changes to the code need to be made before they
|
|
|
will be merged.
|
|
|
- Reviewers should update labels as needed (such as `needs rebase`)
|
|
|
5. Address comments by answering questions or changing code
|
|
|
6. LGTM (Looks good to me)
|
|
|
- Once a Reviewer has completed a review and the code looks ready to merge, an "Approve" review
|
|
|
is used to signal to the contributor and to other maintainers that you have reviewed the code
|
|
|
and feel that it is ready to be merged.
|
|
|
7. Merge or close
|
|
|
- PRs should stay open until merged or if they have not been active for more than 30 days. This
|
|
|
will help keep the PR queue to a manageable size and reduce noise. Should the PR need to stay
|
|
|
open (like in the case of a WIP), the `keep open` label can be added.
|
|
|
- Before merging a PR, refer to the topic on [Size Labels](#size-labels) below to determine if
|
|
|
the PR requires more than one LGTM to merge.
|
|
|
- If the owner of the PR is listed in the `OWNERS` file, that user **must** merge their own PRs
|
|
|
or explicitly request another OWNER do that for them.
|
|
|
- If the owner of a PR is _not_ listed in `OWNERS`, any core maintainer may merge the PR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Documentation PRs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Documentation PRs should be made on the docs repo: <https://github.com/helm/helm-www>. Keeping Helm's documentation up to date is highly desirable, and it is recommend all user facing changes. Accurate and helpful documentation is critical for effectively communicating Helm's behavior to a wide audience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Small, ad-hoc changes/PRs to Helm which introduce user facing changes, which would benefit from documentation changes, should apply the `docs needed` label. Larger changes associated with a HIP should track docs via that HIP. The `docs needed` label doesn't block PRs, and maintainers/PR reviewers should apply discretion judging in whether the `docs needed` label should be applied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## The Triager
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each week, one of the core maintainers will serve as the designated "triager" starting after the
|
|
|
public stand-up meetings on Thursday. This person will be in charge triaging new PRs and issues
|
|
|
throughout the work week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Labels
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables define all label types used for Helm. It is split up by category.
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Label | Description |
|
|
|
| ----- | ----------- |
|
|
|
| `bug` | Marks an issue as a bug or a PR as a bugfix |
|
|
|
| `critical` | Marks an issue or PR as critical. This means that addressing the PR or issue is top priority and must be addressed as soon as possible |
|
|
|
| `docs` | Indicates the issue or PR is a documentation change |
|
|
|
| `feature` | Marks the issue as a feature request or a PR as a feature implementation |
|
|
|
| `keep open` | Denotes that the issue or PR should be kept open past 30 days of inactivity |
|
|
|
| `refactor` | Indicates that the issue is a code refactor and is not fixing a bug or adding additional functionality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Issue Specific
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Label | Description |
|
|
|
| ----- | ----------- |
|
|
|
| `help wanted` | Marks an issue needs help from the community to solve |
|
|
|
| `proposal` | Marks an issue as a proposal |
|
|
|
| `question/support` | Marks an issue as a support request or question |
|
|
|
| `good first issue` | Marks an issue as a good starter issue for someone new to Helm |
|
|
|
| `wont fix` | Marks an issue as discussed and will not be implemented (or accepted in the case of a proposal) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
### PR Specific
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Label | Description |
|
|
|
| ----- | ----------- |
|
|
|
| `awaiting review` | Indicates a PR has been triaged and is ready for someone to review |
|
|
|
| `breaking` | Indicates a PR has breaking changes (such as API changes) |
|
|
|
| `in progress` | Indicates that a maintainer is looking at the PR, even if no review has been posted yet |
|
|
|
| `needs rebase` | Indicates a PR needs to be rebased before it can be merged |
|
|
|
| `needs pick` | Indicates a PR needs to be cherry-picked into a feature branch (generally bugfix branches). Once it has been, the `picked` label should be applied and this one removed |
|
|
|
| `picked` | This PR has been cherry-picked into a feature branch |
|
|
|
| `docs needed` | Tracks PRs that introduces a feature/change for which documentation update would be desirable (non-blocking). Once a suitable documentation PR has been created, then this label should be removed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Size labels
|
|
|
|
|
|
Size labels are used to indicate how "dangerous" a PR is. The guidelines below are used to assign
|
|
|
the labels, but ultimately this can be changed by the maintainers. For example, even if a PR only
|
|
|
makes 30 lines of changes in 1 file, but it changes key functionality, it will likely be labeled as
|
|
|
`size/L` because it requires sign off from multiple people. Conversely, a PR that adds a small
|
|
|
feature, but requires another 150 lines of tests to cover all cases, could be labeled as `size/S`
|
|
|
even though the number of lines is greater than defined below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any changes from the community labeled as `size/S` or larger should be thoroughly tested before
|
|
|
merging and always requires approval from 2 core maintainers. PRs submitted by a core maintainer,
|
|
|
regardless of size, only requires approval from one additional maintainer. This ensures there are at
|
|
|
least two maintainers who are aware of any significant PRs introduced to the codebase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Label | Description |
|
|
|
| ----- | ----------- |
|
|
|
| `size/XS` | Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. Very little testing may be required depending on the change. |
|
|
|
| `size/S` | Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. Only small amounts of manual testing may be required. |
|
|
|
| `size/M` | Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. Manual validation should be required. |
|
|
|
| `size/L` | Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. |
|
|
|
| `size/XL` | Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. |
|
|
|
| `size/XXL` | Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. |
|