399 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
399 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
# Contributing to ethers-rs
|
|
|
|
:balloon: Thanks for your help improving the project! We are so happy to have
|
|
you!
|
|
|
|
There are opportunities to contribute to ethers-rs at any level. It doesn't matter if
|
|
you are just getting started with Rust or are the most weathered expert, we can
|
|
use your help.
|
|
|
|
**No contribution is too small and all contributions are valued.**
|
|
|
|
This guide will help you get started. **Do not let this guide intimidate you**.
|
|
It should be considered a map to help you navigate the process.
|
|
|
|
The [dev channel][dev] is available for any concerns not covered in this guide, please join
|
|
us!
|
|
|
|
[dev]: https://t.me/ethers_rs
|
|
|
|
## Conduct
|
|
|
|
The ethers-rs project adheres to the [Rust Code of Conduct][coc]. This describes
|
|
the _minimum_ behavior expected from all contributors. Instances of violations of the Code of Conduct can be reported by contacting the project team at [me@gakonst.com](mailto:me@gakonst.com).
|
|
|
|
[coc]: https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/code-of-conduct
|
|
|
|
## Contributing in Issues
|
|
|
|
For any issue, there are fundamentally three ways an individual can contribute:
|
|
|
|
1. By opening the issue for discussion: For instance, if you believe that you
|
|
have uncovered a bug in ethers-rs, creating a new issue in the ethers-rs
|
|
issue tracker is the way to report it.
|
|
|
|
2. By helping to triage the issue: This can be done by providing
|
|
supporting details (a test case that demonstrates a bug), providing
|
|
suggestions on how to address the issue, or ensuring that the issue is tagged
|
|
correctly.
|
|
|
|
3. By helping to resolve the issue: Typically this is done either in the form of
|
|
demonstrating that the issue reported is not a problem after all, or more
|
|
often, by opening a Pull Request that changes some bit of something in
|
|
ethers-rs in a concrete and reviewable manner.
|
|
|
|
**Anybody can participate in any stage of contribution**. We urge you to
|
|
participate in the discussion around bugs and participate in reviewing PRs.
|
|
|
|
### Asking for General Help
|
|
|
|
If you have reviewed existing documentation and still have questions or are
|
|
having problems, you can open an issue asking for help.
|
|
|
|
In exchange for receiving help, we ask that you contribute back a documentation
|
|
PR that helps others avoid the problems that you encountered.
|
|
|
|
### Submitting a Bug Report
|
|
|
|
When opening a new issue in the ethers-rs issue tracker, users will be presented
|
|
with a [basic template][template] that should be filled in. If you believe that you have
|
|
uncovered a bug, please fill out this form, following the template to the best
|
|
of your ability. Do not worry if you cannot answer every detail, just fill in
|
|
what you can.
|
|
|
|
The two most important pieces of information we need in order to properly
|
|
evaluate the report is a description of the behavior you are seeing and a simple
|
|
test case we can use to recreate the problem on our own. If we cannot recreate
|
|
the issue, it becomes impossible for us to fix.
|
|
|
|
In order to rule out the possibility of bugs introduced by userland code, test
|
|
cases should be limited, as much as possible, to using only ethers-rs APIs.
|
|
|
|
See [How to create a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example][mcve].
|
|
|
|
[mcve]: https://stackoverflow.com/help/mcve
|
|
[template]: .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
|
|
|
|
### Triaging a Bug Report
|
|
|
|
Once an issue has been opened, it is not uncommon for there to be discussion
|
|
around it. Some contributors may have differing opinions about the issue,
|
|
including whether the behavior being seen is a bug or a feature. This discussion
|
|
is part of the process and should be kept focused, helpful, and professional.
|
|
|
|
Short, clipped responses—that provide neither additional context nor supporting
|
|
detail—are not helpful or professional. To many, such responses are simply
|
|
annoying and unfriendly.
|
|
|
|
Contributors are encouraged to help one another make forward progress as much as
|
|
possible, empowering one another to solve issues collaboratively. If you choose
|
|
to comment on an issue that you feel either is not a problem that needs to be
|
|
fixed, or if you encounter information in an issue that you feel is incorrect,
|
|
explain why you feel that way with additional supporting context, and be willing
|
|
to be convinced that you may be wrong. By doing so, we can often reach the
|
|
correct outcome much faster.
|
|
|
|
### Resolving a Bug Report
|
|
|
|
In the majority of cases, issues are resolved by opening a Pull Request. The
|
|
process for opening and reviewing a Pull Request is similar to that of opening
|
|
and triaging issues, but carries with it a necessary review and approval
|
|
workflow that ensures that the proposed changes meet the minimal quality and
|
|
functional guidelines of the ethers-rs project.
|
|
|
|
## Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
Pull Requests are the way concrete changes are made to the code, documentation,
|
|
and dependencies in the ethers-rs repository.
|
|
|
|
Even tiny pull requests (e.g., one character pull request fixing a typo in API
|
|
documentation) are greatly appreciated. Before making a large change, it is
|
|
usually a good idea to first open an issue describing the change to solicit
|
|
feedback and guidance. This will increase the likelihood of the PR getting
|
|
merged.
|
|
|
|
### Cargo Commands
|
|
|
|
This section lists some commonly needed commands.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
cargo check --all-features
|
|
cargo +nightly fmt --all
|
|
cargo build --all-features
|
|
cargo test --all-features
|
|
cargo +nightly clippy --all-features
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Tests
|
|
|
|
If the change being proposed alters code (as opposed to only documentation for
|
|
example), it is either adding new functionality to ethers-rs or it is fixing
|
|
existing, broken functionality. In both of these cases, the pull request should
|
|
include one or more tests to ensure that ethers-rs does not regress in the future.
|
|
|
|
#### Unit Tests
|
|
|
|
Functions which have very specific tasks should be unit tested. We encourage using
|
|
table tests to cover a large number of cases in a succinct readable manner. A good example
|
|
is the [create2](https://github.com/gakonst/ethers-rs/blob/1d7bdef0bd792867454da28c4e9c193681295fb2/ethers-core/src/utils/mod.rs#L110-L163) unit tests.
|
|
|
|
#### Integration tests
|
|
|
|
Integration tests go in the same crate as the code they are testing. Each sub
|
|
crate should have a `dev-dependency` on `ethers` itself. This makes all
|
|
utilities available to use in tests, no matter the crate being tested.
|
|
|
|
The best strategy for writing a new integration test is to look at existing
|
|
integration tests in the crate and follow the style.
|
|
|
|
#### Documentation tests
|
|
|
|
Ideally, every API has at least one [documentation test] that demonstrates how to
|
|
use the API. Documentation tests are run with `cargo test --doc`. This ensures
|
|
that the example is correct and provides additional test coverage.
|
|
|
|
The trick to documentation tests is striking a balance between being succinct
|
|
for a reader to understand and actually testing the API.
|
|
|
|
Same as with integration tests, when writing a documentation test, the full
|
|
`ethers` crate is available. This is especially useful for getting access to the
|
|
runtime to run the example.
|
|
|
|
The documentation tests will be visible from both the crate specific
|
|
documentation **and** the `ethers` facade documentation via the re-export. The
|
|
example should be written from the point of view of a user that is using the
|
|
`ethers` crate. As such, the example should use the API via the facade and not by
|
|
directly referencing the crate.
|
|
|
|
The type level example for `ethers_providers::Provider` provides a good example of a
|
|
documentation test:
|
|
|
|
````rust
|
|
/// ```no_run
|
|
/// use ethers::providers::{JsonRpcClient, Provider, Http};
|
|
/// use std::convert::TryFrom;
|
|
///
|
|
/// let provider = Provider::<Http>::try_from(
|
|
/// "https://mainnet.infura.io/v3/c60b0bb42f8a4c6481ecd229eddaca27"
|
|
/// ).expect("could not instantiate HTTP Provider");
|
|
///
|
|
/// # async fn foo<P: JsonRpcClient>(provider: &Provider<P>) -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
|
|
/// let block = provider.get_block(100u64).await?;
|
|
/// println!("Got block: {}", serde_json::to_string(&block)?);
|
|
/// # Ok(())
|
|
/// # }
|
|
/// ```
|
|
````
|
|
|
|
Given that this is a _type_ level documentation test and the primary way users
|
|
of `ethers-rs` will create an instance of `Provider` is by using
|
|
`Provider::<T>::try_from`, this is how the documentation test is structured.
|
|
|
|
Lines that start with `/// #` are removed when the documentation is generated.
|
|
They are only there to get the test to run.
|
|
|
|
### Commits
|
|
|
|
It is a recommended best practice to keep your changes as logically grouped as
|
|
possible within individual commits. There is no limit to the number of commits
|
|
any single Pull Request may have, and many contributors find it easier to review
|
|
changes that are split across multiple commits.
|
|
|
|
That said, if you have a number of commits that are "checkpoints" and don't
|
|
represent a single logical change, please squash those together.
|
|
|
|
Note that multiple commits often get squashed when they are landed (see the
|
|
notes about [commit squashing](#commit-squashing)).
|
|
|
|
#### Commit message guidelines
|
|
|
|
A good commit message should describe what changed and why.
|
|
|
|
1. The first line should:
|
|
|
|
- contain a short description of the change (preferably 50 characters or less,
|
|
and no more than 72 characters)
|
|
- be entirely in lowercase with the exception of proper nouns, acronyms, and
|
|
the words that refer to code, like function/variable names
|
|
- be prefixed with the name of the sub crate being changed (without the `ethers-`
|
|
prefix) and start with an imperative verb. If modifying `ethers` proper,
|
|
omit the crate prefix.
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
- providers: introduce ENS querying for names and addresses
|
|
- re-export the abi, types and utils modules from `ethers_core`
|
|
|
|
2. Keep the second line blank.
|
|
3. Wrap all other lines at 72 columns (except for long URLs).
|
|
4. If your patch fixes an open issue, you can add a reference to it at the end
|
|
of the log. Use the `Fixes: #` prefix and the issue number. For other
|
|
references use `Refs: #`. `Refs` may include multiple issues, separated by a
|
|
comma.
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
- `Fixes: #1337`
|
|
- `Refs: #1234`
|
|
|
|
Sample complete commit message:
|
|
|
|
```txt
|
|
subcrate: explain the commit in one line
|
|
|
|
Body of commit message is a few lines of text, explaining things
|
|
in more detail, possibly giving some background about the issue
|
|
being fixed, etc.
|
|
|
|
The body of the commit message can be several paragraphs, and
|
|
please do proper word-wrap and keep columns shorter than about
|
|
72 characters or so. That way, `git log` will show things
|
|
nicely even when it is indented.
|
|
|
|
Fixes: #1337
|
|
Refs: #453, #154
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Opening the Pull Request
|
|
|
|
From within GitHub, opening a new Pull Request will present you with a
|
|
[template] that should be filled out. Please try to do your best at filling out
|
|
the details, but feel free to skip parts if you're not sure what to put.
|
|
|
|
[template]: .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
|
|
|
|
### Discuss and update
|
|
|
|
You will probably get feedback or requests for changes to your Pull Request.
|
|
This is a big part of the submission process so don't be discouraged! Some
|
|
contributors may sign off on the Pull Request right away, others may have
|
|
more detailed comments or feedback. This is a necessary part of the process
|
|
in order to evaluate whether the changes are correct and necessary.
|
|
|
|
**Any community member can review a PR and you might get conflicting feedback**.
|
|
Keep an eye out for comments from code owners to provide guidance on conflicting
|
|
feedback.
|
|
|
|
**Once the PR is open, do not rebase the commits**. See [Commit Squashing](#commit-squashing) for
|
|
more details.
|
|
|
|
### Commit Squashing
|
|
|
|
In most cases, **do not squash commits that you add to your Pull Request during
|
|
the review process**. When the commits in your Pull Request land, they may be
|
|
squashed into one commit per logical change. Metadata will be added to the
|
|
commit message (including links to the Pull Request, links to relevant issues,
|
|
and the names of the reviewers). The commit history of your Pull Request,
|
|
however, will stay intact on the Pull Request page.
|
|
|
|
## Reviewing Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
**Any ethers-rs community member is welcome to review any pull request**.
|
|
|
|
All ethers-rs contributors who choose to review and provide feedback on Pull
|
|
Requests have a responsibility to both the project and the individual making the
|
|
contribution. Reviews and feedback must be helpful, insightful, and geared
|
|
towards improving the contribution as opposed to simply blocking it. If there
|
|
are reasons why you feel the PR should not land, explain what those are. Do not
|
|
expect to be able to block a Pull Request from advancing simply because you say
|
|
"No" without giving an explanation. Be open to having your mind changed. Be open
|
|
to working with the contributor to make the Pull Request better.
|
|
|
|
Reviews that are dismissive or disrespectful of the contributor or any other
|
|
reviewers are strictly counter to the Code of Conduct.
|
|
|
|
When reviewing a Pull Request, the primary goals are for the codebase to improve
|
|
and for the person submitting the request to succeed. **Even if a Pull Request
|
|
does not land, the submitters should come away from the experience feeling like
|
|
their effort was not wasted or unappreciated**. Every Pull Request from a new
|
|
contributor is an opportunity to grow the community.
|
|
|
|
### Review a bit at a time.
|
|
|
|
Do not overwhelm new contributors.
|
|
|
|
It is tempting to micro-optimize and make everything about relative performance,
|
|
perfect grammar, or exact style matches. Do not succumb to that temptation.
|
|
|
|
Focus first on the most significant aspects of the change:
|
|
|
|
1. Does this change make sense for ethers-rs?
|
|
2. Does this change make ethers-rs better, even if only incrementally?
|
|
3. Are there clear bugs or larger scale issues that need attending to?
|
|
4. Is the commit message readable and correct? If it contains a breaking change
|
|
is it clear enough?
|
|
|
|
Note that only **incremental** improvement is needed to land a PR. This means
|
|
that the PR does not need to be perfect, only better than the status quo. Follow
|
|
up PRs may be opened to continue iterating.
|
|
|
|
When changes are necessary, _request_ them, do not _demand_ them, and **do not
|
|
assume that the submitter already knows how to add a test or run a benchmark**.
|
|
|
|
Specific performance optimization techniques, coding styles and conventions
|
|
change over time. The first impression you give to a new contributor never does.
|
|
|
|
Nits (requests for small changes that are not essential) are fine, but try to
|
|
avoid stalling the Pull Request. Most nits can typically be fixed by the ethers-rs
|
|
Collaborator landing the Pull Request but they can also be an opportunity for
|
|
the contributor to learn a bit more about the project.
|
|
|
|
It is always good to clearly indicate nits when you comment: e.g.
|
|
`Nit: change foo() to bar(). But this is not blocking.`
|
|
|
|
If your comments were addressed but were not folded automatically after new
|
|
commits or if they proved to be mistaken, please, [hide them][hiding-a-comment]
|
|
with the appropriate reason to keep the conversation flow concise and relevant.
|
|
|
|
### Be aware of the person behind the code
|
|
|
|
Be aware that _how_ you communicate requests and reviews in your feedback can
|
|
have a significant impact on the success of the Pull Request. Yes, we may land
|
|
a particular change that makes ethers-rs better, but the individual might just not
|
|
want to have anything to do with ethers-rs ever again. The goal is not just having
|
|
good code.
|
|
|
|
### Abandoned or Stalled Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
If a Pull Request appears to be abandoned or stalled, it is polite to first
|
|
check with the contributor to see if they intend to continue the work before
|
|
checking if they would mind if you took it over (especially if it just has nits
|
|
left). When doing so, it is courteous to give the original contributor credit
|
|
for the work they started (either by preserving their name and email address in
|
|
the commit log, or by using an `Author: ` meta-data tag in the commit.
|
|
|
|
_Adapted from the [Tokio contributing guide](https://github.com/tokio-rs/tokio/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)_.
|
|
|
|
[hiding-a-comment]: https://help.github.com/articles/managing-disruptive-comments/#hiding-a-comment
|
|
[documentation test]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustdoc/documentation-tests.html
|
|
|
|
## Releasing
|
|
|
|
Since the ethers-rs project consists of a number of crates, many of which depend on
|
|
each other, releasing new versions to crates.io can involve some complexities.
|
|
We use [`cargo-release`](https://github.com/crate-ci/cargo-release) to manage these
|
|
complexities and the whole release process.
|
|
|
|
When releasing the workspace:
|
|
|
|
1. **Perform a final audit for breaking changes.** Compare the HEAD version of
|
|
crate with the Git tag for the most recent release version. If there are any
|
|
breaking API changes, determine if those changes can be made without breaking
|
|
existing APIs. If so, resolve those issues and make a `minor` change
|
|
release. Otherwise, if it is necessary to make a breaking release, make a
|
|
`major` change release.
|
|
2. **Dry run the release** by running `cargo release --workspace <release_type>`
|
|
3. **Update the changelog for the crate.** Changelog for all crates go in
|
|
[`CHANGELOG.md`](./CHANGELOG.md). Any unreleased changes changelogs should
|
|
be moved to respective crates released changelogs. Change descriptions
|
|
may be taken from the Git history, but should be edited to ensure a consistent
|
|
format, based on [Keep A Changelog][keep-a-changelog]. Other entries in that
|
|
crate's changelog may also be used for reference.
|
|
4. **Release the crate.** Run the following command:
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
cargo release --workspace <release_type> --execute
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
[keep-a-changelog]: https://github.com/olivierlacan/keep-a-changelog/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md
|