contributing.rst

Contributing

The development of Bao projects' components uses the Github ecosystem for contributions, code review, bug reporting, discussion of ideas or any other community development, or project management activities. Therefore, every :term:`contributor` should first create a Github account, if they do not have one already.

If you plan to contribute a significant portion of code, such as an architecture or platform port, a new subsystem or feature, please consider creating a discussion thread, where the design and trade-offs can be first debated among the community and maintainers.

We also recommend you to read our :ref:`licensing terms and the DCO claim <licensing>` before making any contribution.

Roles

The project defines three essential types of roles in the development and contribution process: developer, code owner, and maintainer.

A developer can be internal (if they are part of the project's core team) or are an outside :term:`contributor`. Anyone that contributes in any way to the project (e.g., code, reviews, issues, etc) is assigned to this role.

A code owner must either be part of the core team or someone invited and marked as an outside collaborator by a maintainer. He is responsible for overseeing the development of one or multiple subsystems, that must have a proven record of deep understanding of that modules, specifically by having heavily contributed to their design and/or implementation. Besides, he must participate in code reviews that affect their assigned subsystems.

A maintainer must always be part of the core team. He is the person ultimately responsible for everything in the repository, including code structure, quality, functionality, overall repository architecture, and interoperability. In all, making sure the repository adheres to the project quality standards, high-level goals and vision. They are also responsible for repository management tasks which include:

• setting up :ref:`branch protection rules<branch_protection>`, in particular for the main branch;
• assigning subsystems to code-owners through the :ref:`.CODEOWNERS file<github_files>`;
• keep an updated :ref:`list of authors and contributors<github_files>`;
• coordinating and moderating code reviews;
• final approval and merging of pull-requests (:term:`PR`);
• coordinating, moderating and closing of issues;
• setting up the repository's :ref:`CI pipeline via Github Actions<github_actions>`;
• manage :ref:`topic branches<topic_branches>` (e.g. delete stale ones);
• maintain the overall organization of the repository;
• inviting outside collaborators;

A repository must always have at least one maintainer, that is implicitly the code owner of any subsystems that do not have any other. If a maintainer steps down, it should first nominate a successor, preferably out of the code owners.

Contribution Workflow

The project's development flow for all repositories is centered around the main branch. Any code contribution, be it internal or external, takes the form of a Github :term:`PR` to the main branch. The main branch is then tagged periodically according to the defined :ref:`versioning scheme<versioning>`.

Internal Topic Branches

For long-running developments, internal contributors may create topic branches in the repository itself. Topic branch names should be prefixed with by <type>/ (where type is one of the predetermined :ref:`branch types <commit_branch_types>`), followed by a short descriptor written in lower snake case. For example, when developing a new feature the branch should be named feat/my_new_feature.

Once development on a topic branch ceases, either because it was merged to main or for some reason discarded, the branch must be deleted. Maintainers are ultimately responsible for deleting stale of merged topic branches.

Submitting Commits

If you are an external :term:`contributor` or do not have write permissions to the repository you wish to contribute to, first of all, you should fork that repository. If you do have write privileges over the original repository, you carry out the development directly on it. Follow these steps:

1. Create a topic branch from the main branch;

Note

It is possible to create a topic branch based on another branch. This may be necessary if the changes are dependent on that specific branch. However, if this occurs during step 4 of the process, it is mandatory to make the target branch the one that the new branch is based on.

2. Make all the necessary commits and push your work to your remote fork. Make sure that all the introduced commits and the overall branch follow the :ref:`commit and PR guidelines<commit_guidelines>`;

3. Make sure the branch is synced and can be merged or rebased on main without conflicts. If necessary, rewrite the branch's history, by rebasing it on main;

4. Create a PR targeting the original repository's main branch. In case the PR introduces a large set of modifications, to facilitate the review process, it is recommended to split it into multiple smaller PRs (i.e., :ref:`splitting large PRs <split_prs>`). Ultimately, the assignee will ask you to split the PR if they feel it is too large;

5. Patiently wait for reviews and be engaged when they arrive:

   • participate in the discussion with reviewers;
   • address any refactoring, fixes, or other modifications to your code contribution raised by the reviewers' comments. In doing so, add new commits to the existing pull request. If existing commits need to be modified, rewrite the history and force push them to maintain a clean linear history;
   • always reply to each inline comment/conversation topic opened by the reviewer and never mark it as resolved yourself. The reviewer must be the one to close that conversation in case they agree with the changes;
   • re-request a review from reviewers' after you have addressed all their concerns and modification requests;
   • if the reviewers are taking too long, try contacting the :term:`PR` assignee.

Splitting Large PRs

Code reviews are typically a difficult and time-consuming process. To facilitate the reviewer's work, contributors should try to split their PRs into smaller ones if they feel that the PR introduces a large set of modifications. Nevertheless, the PR assignee decides if the PR is too large and may request splitting it.

To split your large PR, a contributor should follow this process:

• create a topic branch from the main branch and call it wip/<feat_name>. The branch should be protected (:ref:`branch protection rules<branch_protection>`). The <feat_name> should be a short description of the feature, subsystem, or functionality being developed. External contributors should ask maintainers to create this branch for them, whom will become responsible for managing the wip branch and synchronizing with the external contributor;
• this wip/<feat_name> should be the base branch of the overall feature to be submitted. For example, it can be a skeleton PR that only contains the infrastructure of the new functionality;
• submit this base branch as a draft PR and mention on the PR description that it is the base branch for a big feature that will be submitted in multiple PRs;
• continue to introduce the remaining components of the feature one PR at a time, ensuring that each PR is as self-contained as possible.
• when each sub-feature PR is accepted and merged into the wip/<feat_name> branch and the feature is complete, the assignee is responsible to merge the wip/<feat_name> branch into main.

Chain of PRs

A chain of PRs is a sequence of PRs that are dependent on each other. For example, a PR that introduces a new subsystem of a feature inherently depends on the PR that introduces the feature itself. Therefore, the PR that introduces the subsystem must be merged after. In case this happens, a contributor must chain the PRs, avoiding the merge of PRs that are dependent on others in the wrong order. To do so, the contributor must:

• if you are the first to introduce the the chain, follow the typical PR submission process and introduce the first PR of the chain. The contributor should mention on the PR description that it is the first PR of a chain of PRs or, in the case you are following up another PR, mention in the PR description that dependency;
• continue to introduce the remaining PRs of the chain one PR at a time, as pieces of a one-row puzzle, meaning that each PR should be dependent on the previous one. Therefore, when submitting the PR, make sure that the target branch corresponds to the previous PR of the chain;
• as each PR is merged, github will automatically update the target branch of the next PR in the chain. For example, in the below diagram, if wip/base_feat is merged, github automatically changes the target branch of wip/sub_feat1 to main;
• the contributor should mention on the PR description that it is part of a chain of PRs. Tag that PR dependency using a phrase such as "Depends on #<PR-number>";
• this process should not be used to create PRs that are dependent on two or more PRs.

The below diagram provides a visual representation of the chain of PRs:

[main] <- [wip/base_feat] <- [wip/sub_feat1] <- [wip/sub_feat2]

Review Assignment

A :term:`PR` must have at least one assignee and be approved by at least two reviewers. The assignee must be a maintainer which will be responsible for getting the :term:`PR` through, having the ultimate say on its acceptance and that must carry out the final merge. Maintainers must coordinate to choose among them the assignee as PRs arrive. One of the reviewers must also be a maintainer (which can coincide with the assignee).

If a code owner exist for the code being submitted, at least one of them (for each of the files/subsystems) must review the code. Code owners will be automatically assigned as reviewers if the maintainers are correctly managing the :ref:`.CODEOWNERS file<github_files>`. If there are not enough reviewers, the assignee is responsible for appointing a second reviewer. Preferably, a project's internal :term:`contributor`. They might also require and invite more reviewers if there is no consensus.

Review Guide

As much as possible, code quality and enforced standards/guidelines will be automatically checked in the :ref:`CI pipeline <ci>`. Reviewers must be particularly attentive to the ones that are not addressed by these automated tools.

The following are some tips all reviewers should take into account:

• Make sure the code is readable, well commented (includes doxygen comments), and the :term:`PR` provide the appropriate/necessary documentation;

• The code follows the project's :ref:`coding guidelines<coding_guidelines>` as much as possible, especially those not automatically checked such as:

  • code organization, that is, are the files placed correctly? (e.g., architecture specific files in the arch directory);
  • naming conventions for files, functions, variables, types, etc.

• The :term:`PR` complies with all the relevant standards mandated for the specific language or repo in question (e.g. :ref:`MISRA<misra>`);

• There are no obscure binary blobs included in the :term:`PR`;

• Understand the design and implementation decisions behind the :term:`PR`; Try to imagine how you'd go about implementing the same functionality, and engage in discussion when it does not match the proposed approach. Discuss the trade-offs of the various approaches.

• Have a holistic view of the code in mind:

  • how do the modifications affect other subsystems and the maintainability and evolution of the code base?;
  • does the design follow the same philosophy of the over module, repo or project? Be it at the API, architecture, or implementation levels.

• Be on the look out for bugs in both the implementation (e.g. precision loss or wrong operator precedence) and the semantic (does it correctly achieve the desired functionality). Try to reason about corner cases.

• New files contain the necessary :ref:`license and copyright information<licensing>`;

• All the necessary requirement and traceability artifacts or tags are correctly added or updated;

Review the code as much as possible by opening discussions and adding comments inline in the Files Changed tab of the :term:`PR`, and opening a review. When you are done click the Finish Review button and submit the review either by only commenting or requesting explicit changes. As the :term:`contributor` addresses your concerns mark each item as resolved. When you are happy with the current state with the :term:`PR` and agree it should be merged, add a final review with an explicit approval. Beware there might still be new commits after you have approved the :term:`PR` and you might need or be asked to review it again.

Finally, although obvious, self-reviewing is prohibited.

Final Approval and Merging

The final approval of the :term:`PR` to main must be carried out by a maintainer. They should verify the following checklist, although some of it might be automatically checked and enforced by GitHub:

• was reviewed by at least by two reviewers;
• all review comments, suggestions or modification requests have been addressed;
• passes all :ref:`CI pipeline <ci>` checks;
• can be rebased on main without any conflict;

The maintainer shall have as the main objective when integrating the :term:`PR` to maintain a linear git history. Therefore, it should preferably perform either a rebase of the :term:`PR` branch on main (or fast-forward merge if possible) or perform a squash merge if they deem necessary.

If the :term:`PR` originates from an internal topic branch, the branch should be deleted.

Finally, the maintainer should update any :term:`contributor`, :ref:`author and/or code owner files<github_files>`, especially when new files are created.

Commit, Branch, and PRs Guidelines

PRs: Commit History

All contributions must be submitted via Github PRs. You should ensure that all commits in the history within the :term:`PR`:

• have messages that follow the :ref:`conventional commit style<commits_style>`
• introduce small, self-contained logical units of modifications/extensions and don't include irrelevant changes (typo or formatting fixes should be submitted in dedicated PRs);
• are logically related (unrelated modifications or fixes must be addressed in a separate branch/pull-request);
• follow a logical order. That is, a commit that has a dependence on the modifications by a different commit of the same :term:`PR`, is after the former.
• adhere to the project's :ref:`coding guidelines<coding_guidelines>` for the targeted languages;
• tag the necessary requirements;
• introduce code that is readable and sufficiently commented/documented;
• pass all :ref:`base CI pipeline<ci>` checks, by running them locally;
• make sure your code works: test your code in as many targets as possible and write the needed automated tests;
• introduces or updates the necessary documentation;
• the branch can be rebased on main without conflicts;
• the :ref:`appropriate license and copyright information<licensing>` is present and updated;
• make sure you have the rights to all the submitted code and that :ref:`all commits contain a sign-off message<commit_signoff>`, acknowledging the :ref:`DCO<dco>`;

Commits: Structure, Format, and Sign-off

All commits follow a set of guidelines for the message structure and format. Moreover, they should all be sign-off by the contributor.

Message Structure

The git commit messages must always contain a header, a body, and a footer. We follow the Convential Commits specification (with some slight deviations) that provides an easy set of rules for creating an explicit commit history. This leads to more readable messages that are self-explanatory through the project history.

Each commit message has the following structure:

[header]
    <type>(<scope>): <description>

[body]
    <free-form-description>

[footer]
    <ref-issue> <ref-req> <ref-misra> <sign-off>

Message header

The commit message header has a special format that includes a type, a optional scope, and a description. The prefix <type> consists of a noun describing the type of commit. These nouns are pre-defined and described in the below table (:ref:`msg_format`). The optional prefix <scope> may be provided after the type to identify the subsystem, architecture of platform affected by the changes. The <description> field follows immediately after the colon and space after the type/scope prefix. It must provide a short summary of the code changes.

Message body

The commit message body must be descriptive enough to address in the <free-form-description> at least the following points:

• describes the introduced features, fixes, extensions, and refactoring;
• provide a brief rationale for the chosen implementation or overall approach;
• how are you sure it works, i.e., describe the tests and corner cases you ran;

Message footer

The <footer> consists of a list of optional references when the commit:

• <ref-issue>: addresses a GitHub issue (issue ID)
• <ref-misra>: introduces a misra deviation (misra deviation or permit ID)
• <ref-req>: implements a given requirement (requirement ID)
• <sign-off>: a sign-off message that attests that he agrees with the :term:`contributor` adheres :ref:`dco` (see :ref:`commit_signoff`)

Commit Example:

feat(atf): add partitions initialization routine

Start developing the partitions initialization routine. To achieve this we need to: 1. Wake-up
each partitions primary cpu (the partition is responsible to start-up the other cpus) 2. Set-up
cookie registers that should only be accessible by the partitioner (design decision) 3. Jump to
the partition entrypoint A conditional pre-processor macro defines what should be included
(atf_stubs.h) or excluded when building the partitioner for the ATF (ATF_BUILD).

Issue: #123 Signed-off-by: Your Name <[email protected]>

Message Format

The format of the message, especially the header, is checked using the gitlint tool referenced in :ref:`CI pipeline<ci>`. For detailed information on the commit format check the .gitlint file in the CI repository, which defines a certain set of rules that comply with the following list:

• Header must follow Conventional Commits style
• Header length must be < 80 chars and > 10 chars.
• Header cannot have trailing whitespace (space or tab)
• Header cannot have trailing punctuation (?:!.,;)
• Header cannot contain hard tab characters (\t)
• Header cannot have leading whitespace (space or tab)
• Body message must be always specified
• Body lines must be < 80 chars
• Body cannot have trailing whitespace (space or tab)
• Body cannot contain hard tab characters (\t)
• Body first line (second line of commit message) must be empty
• Body length must be at least 20 characters
• Body message must be specified
• Body must contain references to certain files if those files are changed in the last commit

Commit Sign-off

All commits must contain a sign-off message that attests you adhere to the :ref:`DCO<dco>` containing:

• Your Name should be replaced by your legal name
• [email protected] should be replaced by your email that you are using to author the commit

This message must follow the format:

Signed-off-by: Your Name <[email protected]>

You can easily add this to your commit by using -s flag when running the git commit command. Beware that if your changing an existing signed commit, you should add your sign-off right after the previous author. Make sure that your local git name and email configuration are correct and match the ones used in you GitHub account.

git config --global user.name "Your Name" git config --global user.email
"[email protected]"

PRs: Title and Body (Templates)

When submitting a PR, the title message should follow this structure:

<branch-type>/<branch-name>: <short-summary>

All PRs follow a designate template located in .github/pull_request_template.md file. Each time a contributor opens a PR, the Github will automatically generated a body for the PR that follows that template. The contributor must follow the template guidelines before submitting the PR.

Commits and Branch Types

The following are the allowed types for topic branches, commits, and PRs:

• fix: bug fix
• ref: refactoring of a code block that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
• feat: a new feature
• build: changes that affect the build system or external dependencies
• doc: documentation only changes [1]
• perf: a code change that improves performance
• wip: a code change that is still a work in progress
• exp: a code change that is purely experimental for now
• test: adding missing tests or correcting existing ones
• opt: modifications pertaining only to optimizations
• ci: changes to the :term:`CI` configuration files and scripts [2]
• style: changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (formatting, typos, naming, etc.)
• update: changes that brings a feature, setup, or configuration up to date by adding new or updated information (e.g., updating a version, adding a new item to a list, updating CODEOWNERS, bumping the :term:`CI` repo)

[1]	Cannot be used in the bao-docs repo.

[2]	Cannot be used in the bao-ci repo.

Github Repository Setup and Management

Repository Files

Github uses special files which might be used to highlight some information, or automate some specific functionality. The project's repositories must have the following files set up, relative to their top-level directory:

• README: the readme file must have a summary about the repository's content, functionality, etc., as well as a quick guide on how to use it (build, install, etc.);
• LICENSE: a document of the license chosen for the repository and other copyright or legal restrictions;
• CONTRIBUTORS and AUTHORS: list all :ref:`contributors and authors<authors_and_contributors>` that submit code to that repository.
• .github/CODEOWNERS: identifies the coder owners of the repository so they can be automatically notified for code-review. The file first line must assign all files to the repository's maintainers;
• .github/pull_request_template.md: template to be automatically used and generated by Github when a PR is open.
• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md: template to be automatically used and generated by Github when a bug-labeled issue is open.
• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.md: template to be automatically used and generated by Github when a feature-request-labeled issue is open.

Author and Contributors

Besides the git log, Bao Project's repositories should explicitly list their contributors in to files at the repo's top-level:

• The CONTRIBUTORS file must list every person who contributes to the project, even in a minor way with bug fixes, optimizations, etc.
• The AUTHORS files list the developers who have made some significant contribution to the system, such as implementing a new feature, subsystem, port to a new architecture/platform, and the like.

These files must list :term:`contributor`/author per line, preferably in the format

Contributor's Name <[email protected]>

using the name and e-mail associated with their Github accounts and commits. However, if some :term:`contributor` requests to be listed in another format, (e.g. using some alias), we can also accommodate it.

If a :term:`contributor` does not wish to be listed or have any of their information removed, maintainers must fulfill their request.

Preferably, these files should list the contributors/authors in a chronologic order regarding their first contribution. That means each time a new person is added it is appended at the end of the file.

Branch Protection

All repositories should have protection rules configured for both the main and wip/ branches. These rules are designed to enforce the guidelines outlined in the :ref:`contribution workflow<contribution_workflow>`. In the repository's Settings -> Branches menu, the protection rules must be created with the following options:

• Require a pull request before merging:

  • Required approvals: 2
  • Dismiss stale pull request approvals when new commits are pushed
  • Required review from code owners

• Require the status checks to pass before merging

  • Require branches to be up to date before merging

• Require conversation resolution before merging

• Require linear history

• Do not allow bypassing the above settings

Other topic branches might also be subject to protection rules at the will of the repository's maintainers.

CI/GitHub Actions

Every repository must have an automated :ref:`CI pipeline <ci>` setup using GitHub Actions. Specifically, by adding workflow yaml files to the .github/workflows directory. The CI repository contains a number of templates as well as further instructions on how to set it up.

Here are a few workflows a maintainer should add to the repository's :term:`CI`:

• commit message linting: apply gitlint to verify all the PRs' commit messages follow the conventional commit style;
• copyright and license check: making sure all files have the necessary license and copyright information;
• language format/linting: apply the language format checkers defined in the :ref:`CI repository <gitact_checkers>` for the repo's used languages (e.g. clang-format for C or pylint for python);
• static analysis: apply static analyses defined in :ref:`CI repository <gitact_checkers>` for the repo's used language (e.g. misra-check for C language);
• build: build the repository for a representative set of targets and configurations (using GitHub Actions' strategy matrix);

The maintainers are free to add more Github workflows they feel are needed due to the specificities of the repository.

Repository Templates

The bao-ci repo provides a .github/templates folder containing general templates for PRs and Issues. Please be advised that these only provide a set of general topics that a maintainer can use as a basis. The maintainer is responsible for adapting these templates by modifying them or adding fields that they feels are missing, given the repository specificities.

PR Templates

A repository must provide a template that Github will use to auto-populate PR description fields, structuring the report and guiding contributors on what information they should provide. The :term:`maintainer` of the repository is responsible for setting up and organizing these templates, adapting them to the repository's specificities and constraints(e.g., type of changes, tests performed).

The PR template is described in .github/pull_request_template.md.

Issues Templates

A repository must provide templates that Github will use to auto-populate issue description fields, structuring the report and guiding contributors on what information they should provide. The :term:`maintainer` of the repository is responsible for setting up and organizing these templates, adapting them to the repository's specificities and constraints.

At least two issue templates must be created:

• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md: consistently details and organizes a bug report
• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.md: details an idea/suggestion for a new feature and analyzes its trade-offs

Git Submodules Setup

The Git submodules feature is used across several repositories. For example, the CI workflow is typically added as a submodule on other repository subsystems to enable the CI pipeline. When creating a submodule, a developer must ensure that the .gitmodules configuration file (that stores the mapping between the project’s URL and the local subdirectory) uses the SSH URL.

To add a submodule using an SSH URL, you can use the git submodule add command followed by the SSH URL of the repository you want to add as a submodule.

For example:

git submodule add ssh://[email protected]/path/to/repo.git

This will add the repository at the specified SSH URL as a submodule to your current Git repository. Keep in mind that you need to have access to the repository that you want to add as a submodule and be authenticated with the appropriate credentials in order to use an SSH URL.

Final layout of the .gitmodules configuration file:

[submodule "ci"] path = ci url = [email protected]:bao-project/bao-ci.git