Skip to content

Commit ecd7db0

Browse files
StebalienStebalien
committed
feat: add web3 labeling standards
from https://github.com/libp2p/libp2p/blob/master/ISSUE-LABELLING.md and https://github.com/ipfs/community/blob/master/ISSUE_LABELS.md
1 parent 69d4ffa commit ecd7db0

File tree

2 files changed

+224
-0
lines changed

2 files changed

+224
-0
lines changed

‎ISSUE_LABELS.md

Lines changed: 120 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
1+
# W3DT issue labeling standards
2+
3+
The W3DT org standardizes on the following default core labels for GitHub issues and pull requests. This ensures continuity
4+
between repos, helping to improve the overall experience for contributors as a whole while also making it easier to use project
5+
planning tools (such as ZenHub) to create landscape-level views across multiple repos.
6+
7+
## Mandatory labels
8+
9+
### Global
10+
These are exceptions to the remainder of this labeling taxonomy, but exist for continuity with global GitHub practices for new contributors.
11+
12+
| Label | Description | Color |
13+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
14+
| `bounty` | Has bounty! See https://github.com/ipfs/devgrants/projects/1 | `#1cfc60` |
15+
| `good first issue` | Good issue for new contributors | `#7057ff` |
16+
| `help wanted` | Seeking public contribution on this issue | `#0e8a16` |
17+
18+
### Priority
19+
Indicates priority as a function of standard PL-wide OKR priority rankings. **Important: P0 items need an assignee to act as a DRI.**
20+
21+
| Label | Description | Color |
22+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
23+
| `P0` | Critical: Tackled by core team ASAP | `#b60205` |
24+
| `P1` | High: Likely tackled by core team if no one steps up | `#d93f0b` |
25+
| `P2` | Medium: Good to have, but can wait until someone steps up | `#e99695` |
26+
| `P3` | Low: Not priority right now | `#f9d0c4` |
27+
28+
### Kind
29+
Overarching type of issue or PR. For an additional layer of specificity, use the `area` label.
30+
31+
| Label | Description | Color |
32+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
33+
| `kind/architecture` | Core architecture of project | `#c7def8` |
34+
| `kind/bug` | A bug in existing code (including security flaws) | `#fc2929` |
35+
| `kind/discussion` | Topical discussion; usually not changes to codebase | `#c7def8` |
36+
| `kind/enhancement` | A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature | `#c7def8` |
37+
| `kind/maintenance` | Work required to avoid breaking changes or harm to project's status quo | `#c7def8` |
38+
| `kind/support` | A question or request for support | `#c7def8` |
39+
| `kind/test` | Testing work | `#c7def8` |
40+
41+
### Need
42+
These labels indicate needs that must be met in order for the issue or PR to be completed and closed. These will often appear in conjunction with `status/blocked` to add a layer of specificity to the latter. **Important: ALL new issues in a repo should default to `need/triage`, and this label should be removed once all other relevant labels are assigned.**
43+
44+
| Label | Description | Color |
45+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
46+
| `need/analysis` | Needs further analysis before proceeding | `#ededed` |
47+
| `need/author-input` | Needs input from the original author | `#ededed` |
48+
| `need/community-input` | Needs input from the wider community | `#ededed` |
49+
| `need/maintainer-input` | Needs input from the current maintainer(s) | `#ededed` |
50+
| `need/triage` | Needs initial labeling and prioritization | `#ededed` |
51+
52+
## Optional (but helpful) labels
53+
54+
### Expertise
55+
Estimate of required experience to solve the issue; note that this is different than `effort`, below.
56+
57+
| Label | Description | Color |
58+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
59+
| `exp/beginner` | Can be confidently tackled by newcomers | `#bfe5bf` |
60+
| `exp/novice` | Someone with a little familiarity can pick up | `#bfe5bf` |
61+
| `exp/intermediate` | Prior experience is likely helpful | `#bfe5bf` |
62+
| `exp/expert` | Having worked on the specific codebase is important | `#bfe5bf` |
63+
| `exp/wizard` | Extensive knowledge (implications, ramifications) required | `#bfe5bf` |
64+
65+
### Effort
66+
Similar to T-shirt sizing, this estimates the *amount* of work. This can be different than `expertise`, e.g. something can be easy but require a lot of time to complete, or vice versa.
67+
68+
| Label | Description | Color |
69+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
70+
| `effort/hours` | Estimated to take one or several hours | `#fef2c0` |
71+
| `effort/days` | Estimated to take multiple days, but less than a week | `#fef2c0` |
72+
| `effort/weeks` | Estimated to take multiple weeks | `#fef2c0` |
73+
74+
### Status
75+
Current status of the issue or PR. Note that it may be advantageous to add second-tier variants on `status/blocked` to your repo if there are common blocking scenarios, i.e. `status/blocked/upstream-bug`.
76+
77+
| Label | Description | Color |
78+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
79+
| `status/blocked` | Unable to be worked further until needs are met | `#b52ed1` |
80+
| `status/inactive` | No significant work in the previous month | `#dcc8e0` |
81+
| `status/in-progress` | In progress | `#dcc8e0` |
82+
| `status/ready` | Ready to be worked | `#dcc8e0` |
83+
84+
### Topics
85+
Topics will vary according to the particular project, but will often have commonalities that overlay across multiple projects. Design is one prominent example of this, particularly since the following design labels are used to generate a common design tracking board:
86+
87+
| Label | Description | Color |
88+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
89+
| `topic/design-content` | Content design, writing, information architecture | `#3f4b56` |
90+
| `topic/design-front-end` | Front-end implementation of UX/UI work | `#3f4b56` |
91+
| `topic/design-ux` | UX strategy, research, not solely visual design | `#3f4b56` |
92+
| `topic/design-video` | Video and/or motion design | `#3f4b56` |
93+
| `topic/design-visual` | Visual design ONLY, not part of a larger UX effort | `#3f4b56` |
94+
95+
We also use topics to track platform specific issues:
96+
97+
| Label | Description | Color |
98+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
99+
| `topic/windows` | Windows specific issues | `#3f4b56` |
100+
| `topic/macos` | MacOS specific issues | `#3f4b56` |
101+
| `topic/linux` | Linux specific issues | `#3f4b56` |
102+
103+
Other commonly encountered topics across multiple repos include:
104+
105+
| Label | Description | Color |
106+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
107+
| `topic/devexp` | Developer Experience | `#3f4b56` |
108+
| `topic/docs` | Documentation | `#3f4b56` |
109+
| `topic/infra` | Infrastructure | `#3f4b56` |
110+
| `topic/interop` | Interoperability | `#3f4b56` |
111+
| `topic/perf` | Performance | `#3f4b56` |
112+
| `topic/dependencies` | Dependencies | `#3f4b56` |
113+
| `topic/ci` | Continuous integration | `#3f4b56` |
114+
115+
### Area
116+
Areas will vary depending on the needs of the particular repo, but refer to a commonly-encountered functional or abstraction layer for a project. They take the following form, where *foo* is a project-specific functional or abstraction layer, e.g. *firefox* or *libp2p*.
117+
118+
| Label | Description | Color |
119+
| ----- | ----------- | ----- |
120+
| `area/foo` | *Area-specific description to go here* | `#ccf0ed` |

‎proposals/dev-network-testsuite.md

Lines changed: 104 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
1+
# Automated integration testing & test vector extraction
2+
3+
Authors: <!-- List authors' GitHub or other handles -->
4+
5+
Initial PR: TBD <!-- Reference the PR first proposing this document. Oooh, self-reference! -->
6+
7+
## Purpose &amp; impact
8+
#### Background &amp; intent
9+
_Describe the desired state of the world after this project? Why does that matter?_
10+
<!--
11+
Outline the status quo, including any relevant context on the problem you’re seeing that this project should solve. Wherever possible, include pains or problems that you’ve seen users experience to help motivate why solving this problem works towards top-line objectives.
12+
-->
13+
14+
We currently have:
15+
16+
1. A calibration network and some dev networks where we can test specific operations.
17+
2. Unit tests in lotus & specs-actors.
18+
19+
However, we don't have:
20+
21+
1. An automated and fully integrated way to test lotus end-to-end.
22+
2. An easy way to extract comprehensive test vectors after making changes to actors.
23+
24+
This makes it difficult for to make consensus breaking changes then test their correctness on both
25+
lotus and other implementations.
26+
27+
Proposal:
28+
29+
1. Setup a continuously deployed (from master) dev-net for lotus that quickly upgrades to the _latest_ network version.
30+
2. Implement a set of automated test scripts (seal, terminate, mark faulty, recover, make deals, etc.).
31+
3. Automatically extract test vectors from this network and store them in a repo somewhere.
32+
33+
This
34+
35+
#### Assumptions &amp; hypotheses
36+
_What must be true for this project to matter?_
37+
<!--(bullet list)-->
38+
39+
#### User workflow example
40+
_How would a developer or user use this new capability?_
41+
<!--(short paragraph)-->
42+
43+
#### Impact
44+
_How would this directly contribute to web3 dev stack product-market fit?_
45+
46+
<!--
47+
Explain how this addresses known challenges or opportunities.
48+
What awesome potential impact/outcomes/results will we see if we nail this project?
49+
-->
50+
51+
#### Leverage
52+
_How much would nailing this project improve our knowledge and ability to execute future projects?_
53+
54+
<!--
55+
Explain the opportunity or leverage point for our subsequent velocity/impact (e.g. by speeding up development, enabling more contributors, etc)
56+
-->
57+
58+
#### Confidence
59+
_How sure are we that this impact would be realized? Label from [this scale](https://medium.com/@nimay/inside-product-introduction-to-feature-priority-using-ice-impact-confidence-ease-and-gist-5180434e5b15)_.
60+
61+
<!--Explain why this rating-->
62+
63+
64+
## Project definition
65+
#### Brief plan of attack
66+
67+
<!--Briefly describe the milestones/steps/work needed for this project-->
68+
69+
#### What does done look like?
70+
_What specific deliverables should completed to consider this project done?_
71+
72+
#### What does success look like?
73+
_Success means impact. How will we know we did the right thing?_
74+
75+
<!--
76+
Provide success criteria. These might include particular metrics, desired changes in the types of bug reports being filed, desired changes in qualitative user feedback (measured via surveys, etc), etc.
77+
-->
78+
79+
#### Counterpoints &amp; pre-mortem
80+
_Why might this project be lower impact than expected? How could this project fail to complete, or fail to be successful?_
81+
82+
#### Alternatives
83+
_How might this project’s intent be realized in other ways (other than this project proposal)? What other potential solutions can address the same need?_
84+
85+
#### Dependencies/prerequisites
86+
<!--List any other projects that are dependencies/prerequisites for this project that is being pitched.-->
87+
88+
#### Future opportunities
89+
<!--What future projects/opportunities could this project enable?-->
90+
91+
## Required resources
92+
93+
#### Effort estimate
94+
<!--T-shirt size rating of the size of the project. If the project might require external collaborators/teams, please note in the roles/skills section below).
95+
For a team of 3-5 people with the appropriate skills:
96+
- Small, 1-2 weeks
97+
- Medium, 3-5 weeks
98+
- Large, 6-10 weeks
99+
- XLarge, >10 weeks
100+
Describe any choices and uncertainty in this scope estimate. (E.g. Uncertainty in the scope until design work is complete, low uncertainty in execution thereafter.)
101+
-->
102+
103+
#### Roles / skills needed
104+
<!--Describe the knowledge/skill-sets and team that are needed for this project (e.g. PM, docs, protocol or library expertise, design expertise, etc.). If this project could be externalized to the community or a team outside PL's direct employment, please note that here.-->

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)