github.com/huaweicloud/golangsdk@v0.0.0-20210831081626-d823fe11ceba/STYLEGUIDE.md (about) 1 2 ## On Pull Requests 3 4 - Please make sure to read our [contributing guide](/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md). 5 6 - Before you start a PR there needs to be a Github issue and a discussion about it 7 on that issue with a core contributor, even if it's just a 'SGTM'. 8 9 - A PR's description must reference the issue it closes with a `For <ISSUE NUMBER>` (e.g. For #293). 10 11 - A PR's description must contain link(s) to the line(s) in the OpenStack 12 source code (on Github) that prove(s) the PR code to be valid. Links to documentation 13 are not good enough. The link(s) should be to a non-`master` branch. For example, 14 a pull request implementing the creation of a Neutron v2 subnet might put the 15 following link in the description: 16 17 https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/stable/mitaka/neutron/api/v2/attributes.py#L749 18 19 From that link, a reviewer (or user) can verify the fields in the request/response 20 objects in the PR. 21 22 - A PR that is in-progress should have `[wip]` in front of the PR's title. When 23 ready for review, remove the `[wip]` and ping a core contributor with an `@`. 24 25 - Forcing PRs to be small can have the effect of users submitting PRs in a hierarchical chain, with 26 one depending on the next. If a PR depends on another one, it should have a [Pending #PRNUM] 27 prefix in the PR title. In addition, it will be the PR submitter's responsibility to remove the 28 [Pending #PRNUM] tag once the PR has been updated with the merged, dependent PR. That will 29 let reviewers know it is ready to review. 30 31 - A PR should be small. Even if you intend on implementing an entire 32 service, a PR should only be one route of that service 33 (e.g. create server or get server, but not both). 34 35 - Unless explicitly asked, do not squash commits in the middle of a review; only 36 append. It makes it difficult for the reviewer to see what's changed from one 37 review to the next. 38 39 - See [#583](https://github.com/huaweicloud/golangsdk/issues/583) as an example of a 40 well-formatted issue which contains all relevant information we need to review and approve. 41 42 ## On Code 43 44 - In re design: follow as closely as is reasonable the code already in the library. 45 Most operations (e.g. create, delete) admit the same design. 46 47 - Unit tests and acceptance (integration) tests must be written to cover each PR. 48 Tests for operations with several options (e.g. list, create) should include all 49 the options in the tests. This will allow users to verify an operation on their 50 own infrastructure and see an example of usage. 51 52 - If in doubt, ask in-line on the PR. 53 54 ### File Structure 55 56 - The following should be used in most cases: 57 58 - `requests.go`: contains all the functions that make HTTP requests and the 59 types associated with the HTTP request (parameters for URL, body, etc) 60 - `results.go`: contains all the response objects and their methods 61 - `urls.go`: contains the endpoints to which the requests are made 62 63 ### Naming 64 65 - For methods on a type in `results.go`, the receiver should be named `r` and the 66 variable into which it will be unmarshalled `s`. 67 68 - Functions in `requests.go`, with the exception of functions that return a 69 `pagination.Pager`, should be named returns of the name `r`. 70 71 - Functions in `requests.go` that accept request bodies should accept as their 72 last parameter an `interface` named `<Action>OptsBuilder` (eg `CreateOptsBuilder`). 73 This `interface` should have at the least a method named `To<Resource><Action>Map` 74 (eg `ToPortCreateMap`). 75 76 - Functions in `requests.go` that accept query strings should accept as their 77 last parameter an `interface` named `<Action>OptsBuilder` (eg `ListOptsBuilder`). 78 This `interface` should have at the least a method named `To<Resource><Action>Query` 79 (eg `ToServerListQuery`).