Commit 1b5b1156 authored by Jan Kiszka's avatar Jan Kiszka
Browse files

Add CONTRIBUTING guide and workflow explanation

Shall both help new comers to understand in which form patches are
requested and what will happen to them normally after submitting them.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka's avatarJan Kiszka <>
parent 09b207f9
Contributing to Xenomai
Contributions to Xenomai are always welcome. This document explains the general
requirements on contributions and the recommended preparation steps. It also
sketches the typical integration process of patches.
Contribution Checklist
- use git to manage your changes [*recomended*]
- follow Linux Kernel coding style [**required**]
- see also [Linux kernel coding style](
- try out the script from the Linux kernel
- add the required copyright header to each new file introduced [**required**]
- structure patches logically, in small steps [**required**]
- one separable functionality/fix/refactoring = one patch
- do not mix those there in a single patch
- after each patch, the tree still has to build and work, i.e. do not add
even temporary breakages inside a patch series (helps when tracking down
- use `git rebase -i` to restructure a patch series
- base patches on top of latest master or - if there are dependencies - on next
(note: next is an integration branch that may change non-linearly) [**required**]
- test patches sufficiently AFTER the last edit (obvious, but...) [**required**]
- add signed-off to all patches [**required**]
- to certify the "Developer's Certificate of Origin", see below
- check with your employer when not working on your own!
- indicate if you think a patch fixes a bug present in a stable branch as well [*recomended*]
- add a note to the cover letter of the patch series
- or add some remark after the "---" separator of the patch itself
- post patches to mailing list [**required**]
- use `git format-patch/send-email` if possible
- send patches inline, do not append them
- no HTML emails!
- CC people who you think should look at the patches, e.g.
- affected maintainers
- someone who wrote a change that is fixed or reverted by you now
- who commented on related changes in the recent past
- who otherwise has expertise and is interested in the topic
- pull requests on gitlab are only optional
- post follow-up version(s) if feedback requires this [**required**]
- send reminder if nothing happened after about two weeks [*recomended*]
Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
When signing-off a patch for this project like this
Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <>
using your real name (no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions), you declare the
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
(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.
See also [Sign your work - the Developer’s Certificate of Origin](
for further background on this process which was adopted from the Linux kernel.
Contribution Integration Process
1. patch reviews performed on mailing list
* at least by maintainers, but everyone is invited
* feedback has to consider design, functionality and style
* simpler and clearer code preferred, even if original code works fine
2. accepted patches merged into next branch
3. further testing done by community, including CI build tests, code analyzer
runs, on-target tests
4. if no new problems or discussions showed up, acceptance into master
* grace period for master: about 3 days
* urgent fixes may be applied sooner
5. a stable-relevant patch is applied to the related stable branch after it was
merged into master (except for patches that are stable-specific)
gitlab facilities are not used for the review process so that people can follow
all changes and related discussions at a single stop, the mailing list. This
may change in the future if gitlab should improve their email integration.
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment