Update CONTRIBUTING.md with new guidelines for PRs and AI-assisted co…#78
Update CONTRIBUTING.md with new guidelines for PRs and AI-assisted co…#78
Conversation
…ntributions; remove outdated session analysis report and cost calculation design documents.
Summary of ChangesHello @matt1398, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request refines the project's contribution standards by updating the Highlights
Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates the CONTRIBUTING.md file with new guidelines for pull requests and AI-assisted contributions, and also removes several outdated design and planning documents. The new guidelines are a valuable addition, promoting better practices. My review includes one suggestion to consolidate some of the new rules in CONTRIBUTING.md to improve clarity and reduce redundancy.
| ## What Does NOT Belong in the Repo | ||
| - Personal planning/workflow artifacts (AI session plans, task lists, etc.) | ||
| - Large static data that could be fetched at runtime | ||
| - Generated files that aren't part of the build output | ||
| - Experimental features without prior discussion |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This new section What Does NOT Belong in the Repo is a great addition for clarity. However, some of its points seem to overlap with guidelines introduced earlier in this document.
For example:
Personal planning/workflow artifacts(line 43) is very similar to the rule aboutAI workflow artifactsin the "AI-Assisted Contributions" section (line 38).Large static data that could be fetched at runtime(line 44) is similar to the guideline onlarge hardcoded data blobsin the "Pull Request Guidelines" section (line 31).Experimental features without prior discussion(line 46) is related to the guideline onLarge changesneeding prior discussion (line 30).
To improve conciseness and avoid potential inconsistencies in the future, consider consolidating these related points. You could either make this section the single source of truth for what's not allowed, or merge these rules into the more detailed sections above and remove this summary section.
…ntributions; remove outdated session analysis report and cost calculation design documents.