diff --git a/docs/core/contributing.md b/docs/core/contributing.md
index 45f8803a50e8d71b95d3c0d13b3be71672d57321..226f52a5fbe81d6cbcf55900af6b79d3c0e0609a 100644
--- a/docs/core/contributing.md
+++ b/docs/core/contributing.md
@@ -6,95 +6,22 @@ This chapter assumes that you have identified a bug or improvement for CiviCRM w
This chapter will refer to a number of resources that are explained in greater depth in the [Developer Community](/basics/community.md) chapter.
-## Check the latest version
-There's no sense in planning any changes to CiviCRM's core code without looking at the most recent release. Any changes you make will be based upon it, and it may include a fix or attempted resolution that may change your thinking about the issue.
+## Create an issue
-It's best to start with upgrading your own site rather than just trying to use one with demo data. That way, you can be sure to know how the system behaves with your real-life data.
+Creating a good issue is an important first step and often involves research, discussion, and thoughtful description.
-If upgrading your site doesn't resolve it, try a plain installation of CiviCRM, such as one generated with Buildkit. This will ensure that your site-specific data isn't the problem, and having a plain vanilla site will be important for trying out your changes later.
+[Following these comprehensive steps](/tools/issue-tracking.md#guidelines) to create your issue.
-## Talk over the issue
+## Document your change
-To get your ideas together for later steps, it's best to start with a conversation. This doesn't need to be technical, but it should be with someone familiar with using CiviCRM. A coworker or consultant might be a place to start, or you could talk it over on [Mattermost](https://chat.civicrm.org/) or [Stack Exchange](http://civicrm.stackexchange.com/).
-
-In your conversation, think about some of the following questions:
-
-- How severe is the impact on organizations using CiviCRM?
-
-- Has this feature's behavior changed recently? Is a bug a regression, or has it always been this way? Is this a new feature that doesn't handle all situations properly?
-
-- Who might like things the way they are? Are there ways to resolve the issue that meet their needs as well as yours?
-
-- Will your change be self-explanatory, or will other users need an explanation?
-
-If you are able to coherently explain the problem and resolution—and reasonably confident that fix will be good for everyone—it's time to register the issue with CiviCRM.
-
-## Research existing issues
-
-It's now time to get your issue into [Jira](https://issues.civicrm.org/). To start, search for existing issues that may be the same as or related to yours. Jira's search will order by relevance, but you are searching over a decade of issues, so you may get overwhelmed with old items. Consider filtering Created Date to two years ago or newer.
-
-If an issue directly describes your situtation, your job will be different: read it over, and edit or comment as necessary. If the issue is marked as closed and completed, you should create a new issue indicating a regression, and you should link to the original issue you found.
-
-If issues you find are related but not quite the same, you should still record them so that you can mention them in the issue you create.
-
-## Describe the issue
-
-Now's the time to create your issue. Give it a title that describes your issue concisely, and explain the issue in the details. In writing your issue, remember that your audience includes a variety of people:
-
-- Other users encountering the same problem now
-- Maintainers deciding whether to include your code
-- Developers considering future changes
-- The release notes editor compiling the notes
-- Users browsing what's new in an upcoming version
-
-Readers will come from different perspectives and contexts, so thorough explanations and coherent summaries are valuable. A well-written issue will be taken more seriously, increasing the likelihood that your changes are accepted and that others engage in your issue.
-
-### Naming your issue
-
-*Vague issue titles are boring and unhelpful.* They don't inspire people to use or upgrade CiviCRM, and they make it difficult for implementors and developers to know what's different. Don't say "improve" unless the improvement is so scattered and subtle that you can't say anything else. Instead, make the specific improvements explicit.
-
-Bug titles are slightly different, but they still should never be vague. *A good bug title simply says the bad thing that's happening.* Great examples include the following:
-
-- "Batch merge redirects users to snippet URL"
-- "Contribution page: missing translation"
-- "Cannot create smart group from 'Find participants'"
-
-The best leave no question as to what was going wrong or what has changed: something undesirable was happening, and once this issue is resolved, it won't happen anymore.
-
-### Issue scope
-
-*It's important to keep your issue snappy and closeable.* A Jira issue that stays open long after commits have been merged into core is confusing to users and demoralizing for contributors. The way to prevent this is to make issues distinct and coherent so they're clearly done or not done.
-
-Better yet, describe the issue distinctly and coherently yourself. If you find an existing issue that was reported vaguely, there's no reason not to revise the description. If the original issue involves several things, don't be shy about closing it and opening new ones--just document what you've done.
-
-A rule of thumb is that if an issue has more than 2 or 3 pull requests in GitHub (described below), something is wrong. It may be a series of false starts, and that's okay, but if it's a bunch of pull requests against the same repository, you probably should have opened new issues to describe the separate features or bugs—or to document a regression or feature gap.
-
-### Categorization
-
-Categorization is useful for finding issues in Jira, and it also determines how issues appear in the release notes.
-
-When setting the issue **Type**, "Bug" results in it being listed among Bugs Resolved in the release notes. Otherwise, issues appear in Features.
-
-The **Component/s** field determines where the issue goes in the notes, but it will only go one place. There's no value in saying something is "Accounting Integration", "CiviContribute", "CiviEvent", and "WordPress Integration": the editor will pick the most relevant one for the notes.
-
-The **Priority** field can get contentious, but use your best sense as to the impact that your issue will have. Think of it as the product of the breadth (the size of the user base that may notice) and depth (how much those users are affected) of the issue.
-
-**Affects Version/s** doesn't need to be each and every version that the problem affects, but it is helpful to indicate the extent of it. Include the latest version you tested it on, and include the earliest version in the stable and long-term support series you know it to affect.
-
-You might wonder what the **Funding Source** means. If you plan on writing code yourself, mark it as "Contributed Code". Otherwise, mark it as "Needs Funding".
-
-## Document the feature
-
-Now that you have an issue created, you can start work. The best place to begin is to document what you want to happen. By writing the documentation first, you have a way to measure whether the feature works.
-
-If you're addressing a bug, document the feature that the bug affects. You may find documentation in the [User and Administrator Guide](https://docs.civicrm.org/user/en/stable/), or you may have to start from scratch. Either way, save what you do and contribute it back to the guide once you're finished.
+Your changes might require documentation updates. Read about [when to document](/documentation/index.md#when) and [how to document](/documentation/index.md#contributing) and follow steps as necessary.
## Write tests
-Having a plain-language description of how things should work in hand, it's time to operationalize the description and build automated tests for the feature. CiviCRM comes with a variety of [testing tools](https://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/Testing) that help ensure that changes don't break existing functionality.
+Having a plain-language description of how things should work in hand, it's time to operationalize the description and build automated tests for the feature. CiviCRM comes with a variety of [testing tools](/testing/setup.md) that help ensure that changes don't break existing functionality.
-Since CiviCRM doesn't release code with failing tests, your bug or improvement must not be covered in the existing tests. Maybe there are incomplete tests, maybe the tests aren't valid measures of the functionality, or maybe your feature lacks test coverage. Either way, you will need to write them to make sure your work doesn't get undermined by future changes.
+Since CiviCRM [doesn't release code with failing tests](/tools/jenkins.md), your bug or improvement must not be covered in the existing tests. Maybe there are incomplete tests, maybe the tests aren't valid measures of the functionality, or maybe your feature lacks test coverage. Either way, you will need to write them to make sure your work doesn't get undermined by future changes.
Use your documentation to identify tests that can be run, and then write them. If you are adding functionality, you may not have the code that the test will call, but you can write your tests as if all the pages and functions exist, defining them later.
@@ -106,21 +33,21 @@ The key in making changes is legibility: helping others see what you've changed
### Coding style
-One element of legibility is literal: make your changes according to the [CiviCRM coding standards](https://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/PHP+Code+and+Inline+Documentation), which are just a relaxed version of [Drupal's standards](https://www.drupal.org/docs/develop/standards). This doesn't just make the code more readable on its own; standards make the diff more legible too.
+One element of legibility is literal: make your changes according to the [CiviCRM coding standards](/standards/index.md). This doesn't just make the code more readable on its own; standards make the diff more legible too.
-Each pull request is automatically tested by PHP_CodeSniffer according to [the standards](https://github.com/civicrm/coder), and you should save time and test your code yourself.
+Each pull request is [automatically tested](/tools/jenkins.md) by PHP_CodeSniffer according to [the standards](https://github.com/civicrm/coder), and you should save time and test your code yourself.
### Making commits
-In making commits, remember that this isn't just a small personal project: your audience is hundreds of other developers—now and ten years from now—as well as end users trying to understand features and bugs. By leaving a commit history that makes sense—both in content and in [commit messages](https://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/Git+Commit+Messages+for+CiviCRM)—you will make the code more legible for everyone.
+Follow these steps to [make high-quality commits](/tools/git.md#committing).
Once you've completed the work, revisit your documentation and tests to see if you've missed anything.
## Open a pull request
-Open a pull request on GitHub to merge your development branch with the `master` branch. Check that the title makes sense and that the description indicates what's going on. Pull request titles don't need to be identical to issue titles, and in particular, you may want to focus more positively on the changes in code than on the broader feature changes.
+Read about [creating a pull request](/tools/git.md#pr) which includes information on writing a good subject line and minding the scope of your PR.
-Once you submit your pull request, CiviCRM's Jenkins server will build a copy of CiviCRM and run tests against it, beginning with PHP_CodeSniffer. If tests fail, you will be able to follow a link to view details.
+Once you submit your pull request, CiviCRM's [Jenkins server](/tools/jenkins.md) will build a copy of CiviCRM and run tests against it, beginning with `PHP_CodeSniffer`. If tests fail, you will be able to follow a link to view details.
Other developers may comment on your code, raising questions or concerns or marking the changes as approved. This is fine, but it is important not to hide important discussion. If substantive discussion occurs in a pull request, note it in Jira. If a pull request is closed in favor of another, explain that in Jira and mention the old pull request in the new one.
@@ -130,7 +57,7 @@ The goal is that the next person working on this feature area shouldn't have to
While your pull request is reviewed, and even after it is merged, you will need to maintain your code on the site that needed the changes. There are two main techniques for this.
-First, you can keep your `civicrm` directory under version control, including your changes there. If you need to upgrade while your changes are still in review, rebase your changes on top of the new version.
+First, you can keep your `civicrm` directory under version control, including your changes there. If you need to upgrade while your changes are still in review, [rebase](/tools/git.md#rebase) your changes on top of the new version.
Alternatively, you can use a custom PHP or template override directory. While this is generally discouraged for long-term customizations of your site (extensions are better), it can be an efficient way to track short-term overrides. Just declare the path to the custom PHP and template folders in the Administer - System Settings - Directories page and copy your changed file(s) there, placing them under the same directory structure as within the `civicrm-core` repository. Note the issue number and pull request in a comment at the top of each file, and remember to check the directory each time you upgrade. Once your change is merged, just delete the override.
diff --git a/docs/core/pr-review.md b/docs/core/pr-review.md
index 5689e54a190e305394cf290b38beecbc06df8f36..06d6fbc4c821a4035307d25bdd1e824ba3f8c570 100644
--- a/docs/core/pr-review.md
+++ b/docs/core/pr-review.md
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# How to review a core pull request
-When someone [opens a pull request](/core/contributing.md#open-a-pull-request) (aka "PR") on CiviCRM Core, it must be reviewed before we can merge it. Reviewing core PRs is a useful (and often much-needed) way of contributing to CiviCRM. You do not need any special access or merge rights. What you do need, is...
+When someone [opens a pull request](/tools/git.md#pr) (aka "PR") on CiviCRM Core, it must be reviewed before we can merge it. Reviewing core PRs is a useful (and often much-needed) way of contributing to CiviCRM. You do not need any special access or merge rights. What you do need, is...
* [GitHub Account](https://github.com)
* A [CiviCRM Development Environment](https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-buildkit/blob/master/doc/civibuild.md) (this might be optional, but good to have). One benefit is the ability to check out the PR in your environment.
diff --git a/docs/documentation/index.md b/docs/documentation/index.md
index a64f3e313a57bc46541ae9faba1d43e0a02646ee..1f77abed22e20ef008e3ae2cca2a7c5b84962cb6 100644
--- a/docs/documentation/index.md
+++ b/docs/documentation/index.md
@@ -12,6 +12,23 @@ This page describes the details of the documentation systems within CiviCRM and
[migration]: https://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/Content+migration+from+wiki+to+Developer+Guide
[wiki]: https://wiki.civicrm.org/confluence/display/CRMDOC/CiviCRM+Documentation
+
+## When to document {:#when}
+
+If you are [contributing to core](/core/contributing.md), updating documenting along with your changes is an important step to ensure the long-term usability and maintainability of CiviCRM.
+
+Not all changes require documentation updates. Here are some guidelines:
+
+* Documentation should almost always accompany **new features**.
+ * Keep in mind that some features are user-facing (and thus require new documentation in the User Guide) whereas some features are *developer*-facing (and thus require new documentation in the Developer Guide.)
+* Bug fixes will occasionally require documentation updates. Check existing docs to see what changes might be necessary.
+
+!!! tip
+ Try writing documentation *before* writing your code! Then you have a way to organize your thoughts and measure whether the feature works.
+
+If you are [submitting a core pull request](/tools/git.md#pr) and would like to submit accompanying doc changes, please provide comments in both pull requests for cross reference. Your docs PR will not be merged until your core PR is merged first.
+
+
## Guides in MkDocs
We are using [MkDocs](http://www.mkdocs.org) to produce guides. The content for each of these guides is written in [markdown](/documentation/markdown.md), stored in text files, and hosted in a repository on GitHub. Then, the guides are automatically published to [docs.civicrm.org](https://docs.civicrm.org) using our custom [publishing system](https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-docs).
@@ -31,7 +48,7 @@ In rarer cases, if you have an edit that pertains to a specific version, (e.g. d
A guide can have multiple languages, and we use separate repositories for different languages. For example, you can click *See all X editions* and find the repositories for additional languages.
-## Contributing to documentation
+## Contributing to documentation {:#contributing}
We welcome contributions, small and large, to documentation!
diff --git a/docs/standards/index.md b/docs/standards/index.md
index fbc442d2fada282d20d1c53a8ae4a80027dbae59..05b7bfb76dc68b47840862ab38c8afc884bb26fd 100644
--- a/docs/standards/index.md
+++ b/docs/standards/index.md
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ In general, CiviCRM follow's the [Drupal Coding Standards](https://www.drupal.or
## Continuous integration
-Jenkins will automatically check all pull requests for coding standards conformance, and code which does not meet the standards will not be merged.
+[Jenkins](/tools/jenkins.md) will automatically check all pull requests for coding standards conformance, and code which does not meet the standards will not be merged.
## Tools
diff --git a/docs/tools/git.md b/docs/tools/git.md
index f4a325df514f9914aaf26defa61c86bb79337dc8..57766517e562e28973cfaa60c0ef18042842ab32 100644
--- a/docs/tools/git.md
+++ b/docs/tools/git.md
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ Whether you are contributing to civicrm-core or an ancillary project (using GitH
1. **Choose the correct base branch** in the upstream repository as the starting point for your changes. (Usually this will be `master`.) *[Learn more...](#base-branch)*
1. (If it's been some time since you've cloned) **pull or fetch** the latest changes from the *upstream repository* into the appropriate branch of your local repository. *(You might also need to [upgrade your civibuild site](/tools/civibuild.md#upgrade-site).)*
1. Create (and checkout) a **new branch** for your changes, based on the correct branch (chosen above) in the upstream repository. *[Learn more...](#branching)*
-1. Make your changes.
+1. Make your changes. (Take care to follow the guidelines in [contributing to core](/core/contributing.md).)
1. **Commit** your changes. *[Learn more...](#commiting)*
1. **Push** your changes *to your fork*.
1. **Open a pull request**. *[Learn more...](#pr)*
@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ Whether you are contributing to civicrm-core or an ancillary project (using GitH
1. If you need to make more changes later, commit them on the same branch and push your new commits to your fork. The new commits the will automatically appear in the pull request.
1. If other people commit changes to the upstream repository which create *merge conflicts* in your pull request, then **rebase** your branch. *[Learn more...](#rebasing)*
1. Once your changes are merged, delete your local branch
+
+See also: [reviewing someone else's pull request](/core/pr-review.md)
## Specific steps
@@ -99,6 +101,8 @@ As much as possible, separate your changes into distinct commits that each make
#### Writing a commit message {:#commit-messages}
+When making commits, remember that this isn't just a small personal project: your audience is hundreds of other developers — now and ten years from now — as well as end users trying to understand features and bugs. By leaving a commit history that makes sense — both in content and in commit messages — you will make the code more legible for everyone.
+
Follow these guidelines to write a good commit messages:
* The first line should be a meaningful **subject**, which should:
@@ -131,7 +135,7 @@ Follow these guidelines to write a good commit messages:
#### Writing a pull request subject {:#pr-subject}
-Guidelines for writing a good subject line:
+Pull request titles don't need to be identical to issue titles, and in particular, you may want to focus more positively on the changes in code than on the broader feature changes. Here are some guidelines for writing a good subject line:
When filing a pull-request, use a descriptive subject. These are good examples:
@@ -159,6 +163,10 @@ A good pull request addresses a clearly-defined problem. There should be a detai
There is no size limit for PRs as long as they are focused on completely solving a discreet problem. As a practical matter, though, bigger PRs may take longer to review and merge. When possible, split "epic" issues into bite-sized chunks as long as each seperate PR is functionally complete and does not cause merge conflicts with your other PRs. In the latter case, add commits to an existing PR.
+#### Reviewing a pull request
+
+See [How to review a core pull request](/core/pr-review.md)
+
### Rebasing {:#rebasing}
__TODO__
diff --git a/docs/tools/issue-tracking.md b/docs/tools/issue-tracking.md
index c5dd13b60885693ed66dfed6336c73fd9aaa622d..32cacfc80313b34bd93700c8ff61c62bf8c9f7d3 100644
--- a/docs/tools/issue-tracking.md
+++ b/docs/tools/issue-tracking.md
@@ -44,7 +44,90 @@ Used as an issue-tracking system for:
In 2017, CiviCRM began to use a private GitLab installation for *some* projects.
-## Guidelines
+## Guidelines for creating issues {:#guidelines}
-* All changes to CiviCRM *Core*, however small, must receive a Jira issue. This helps us assemble the [release notes](https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-core/tree/master/release-notes).
+### When to create an issue {:#when-to-create}
+All changes to CiviCRM *Core*, however small, must receive a Jira issue. Among other things, this helps us assemble the [release notes](https://github.com/civicrm/civicrm-core/tree/master/release-notes).
+
+For other (non-core) ancillary projects, it's okay [submit a pull request](/tools/git.md#pr) *without* first creating an issue.
+
+### Check the latest version {:#check-version}
+
+There's no sense in planning any changes to CiviCRM's core code without looking at the most recent release. Any changes you make will be based upon it, and it may include a fix or attempted resolution that may change your thinking about the issue.
+
+It's best to start with upgrading your own site rather than just trying to use one with demo data. That way, you can be sure to know how the system behaves with your real-life data.
+
+If upgrading your site doesn't resolve it, try a plain installation of CiviCRM, such as one generated with Buildkit. This will ensure that your site-specific data isn't the problem, and having a plain vanilla site will be important for trying out your changes later.
+
+### Talk over the issue {:#talk}
+
+To get your ideas together for later steps, it's best to start with a conversation. This doesn't need to be technical, but it should be with someone familiar with using CiviCRM. A coworker or consultant might be a place to start, or you could talk it over on [Mattermost](https://chat.civicrm.org/) or [Stack Exchange](http://civicrm.stackexchange.com/).
+
+In your conversation, think about some of the following questions:
+
+- How severe is the impact on organizations using CiviCRM?
+
+- Has this feature's behavior changed recently? Is a bug a regression, or has it always been this way? Is this a new feature that doesn't handle all situations properly?
+
+- Who might like things the way they are? Are there ways to resolve the issue that meet their needs as well as yours?
+
+- Will your change be self-explanatory, or will other users need an explanation?
+
+If you are able to coherently explain the problem and resolution—and reasonably confident that fix will be good for everyone—it's time to register the issue with CiviCRM.
+
+### Research existing issues {:#research}
+
+It's now time to get your issue into [Jira](https://issues.civicrm.org/). To start, search for existing issues that may be the same as or related to yours. Jira's search will order by relevance, but you are searching over a decade of issues, so you may get overwhelmed with old items. Consider filtering Created Date to two years ago or newer.
+
+If an issue directly describes your situation, your job will be different: read it over, and edit or comment as necessary. If the issue is marked as closed and completed, you should create a new issue indicating a regression, and you should link to the original issue you found.
+
+If issues you find are related but not quite the same, you should still record them so that you can mention them in the issue you create.
+
+### Describe the issue {:#describe}
+
+Now's the time to create your issue. Give it a title that describes your issue concisely, and explain the issue in the details. In writing your issue, remember that your audience includes a variety of people:
+
+- Other users encountering the same problem now
+- Maintainers deciding whether to include your code
+- Developers considering future changes
+- The release notes editor compiling the notes
+- Users browsing what's new in an upcoming version
+
+Readers will come from different perspectives and contexts, so thorough explanations and coherent summaries are valuable. A well-written issue will be taken more seriously, increasing the likelihood that your changes are accepted and that others engage in your issue.
+
+#### Naming your issue {:#naming}
+
+*Vague issue titles are boring and unhelpful.* They don't inspire people to use or upgrade CiviCRM, and they make it difficult for implementors and developers to know what's different. Don't say "improve" unless the improvement is so scattered and subtle that you can't say anything else. Instead, make the specific improvements explicit.
+
+Bug titles are slightly different, but they still should never be vague. *A good bug title simply says the bad thing that's happening.* Great examples include the following:
+
+- "Batch merge redirects users to snippet URL"
+- "Contribution page: missing translation"
+- "Cannot create smart group from 'Find participants'"
+
+The best leave no question as to what was going wrong or what has changed: something undesirable was happening, and once this issue is resolved, it won't happen anymore.
+
+#### Issue scope {:#scope}
+
+*It's important to keep your issue snappy and closeable.* A Jira issue that stays open long after commits have been merged into core is confusing to users and demoralizing for contributors. The way to prevent this is to make issues distinct and coherent so they're clearly done or not done.
+
+Better yet, describe the issue distinctly and coherently yourself. If you find an existing issue that was reported vaguely, there's no reason not to revise the description. If the original issue involves several things, don't be shy about closing it and opening new ones--just document what you've done.
+
+A rule of thumb is that if an issue has more than 2 or 3 pull requests in GitHub (described below), something is wrong. It may be a series of false starts, and that's okay, but if it's a bunch of pull requests against the same repository, you probably should have opened new issues to describe the separate features or bugs—or to document a regression or feature gap.
+
+See also: [pull request scope](/tools/git.md#pr-scope)
+
+#### Categorization {:#categorization}
+
+Categorization is useful for finding issues in Jira, and it also determines how issues appear in the release notes.
+
+When setting the issue **Type**, "Bug" results in it being listed among Bugs Resolved in the release notes. Otherwise, issues appear in Features.
+
+The **Component/s** field determines where the issue goes in the notes, but it will only go one place. There's no value in saying something is "Accounting Integration", "CiviContribute", "CiviEvent", and "WordPress Integration": the editor will pick the most relevant one for the notes.
+
+The **Priority** field can get contentious, but use your best sense as to the impact that your issue will have. Think of it as the product of the breadth (the size of the user base that may notice) and depth (how much those users are affected) of the issue.
+
+**Affects Version/s** doesn't need to be each and every version that the problem affects, but it is helpful to indicate the extent of it. Include the latest version you tested it on, and include the earliest version in the stable and long-term support series you know it to affect.
+
+You might wonder what the **Funding Source** means. If you plan on writing code yourself, mark it as "Contributed Code". Otherwise, mark it as "Needs Funding".