I significantly expanded PipeCD's contributing guidelines, adding comprehensive sections that make it easier for developers to start contributing to this CNCF Sandbox project.
What is PipeCD?
PipeCD is a CNCF Sandbox GitOps continuous deployment tool. As an open-source project, clear contribution guidelines are essential for growing the contributor community.
The Problem
Issue #6124 identified gaps in PipeCD's contribution documentation:
- Minimal guidance on getting started with development
- No clear information about community channels
- Limited details on the PR review process
- Contributors felt uncertain about how to engage with the project
My Solution
I expanded the contributing documentation significantly across 3 files:
Community Engagement Section
- Where to ask questions (Slack, GitHub Discussions)
- How to report bugs and request features
- Communication guidelines and code of conduct
- Ways to contribute beyond code (documentation, testing, design)
Development Setup
- Step-by-step local development environment setup
- How to build PipeCD from source
- Running tests and validating changes
- Common development workflows and tips
PR Process Details
- How to structure commits and PR titles
- What information to include in PR descriptions
- Review process expectations and timelines
- How to respond to feedback and iterate
Documentation Restructure
- Renamed "Contributing" to "Contribute to PipeCD" for clarity
- Applied changes to both docs-dev and docs-v1.0.x for consistency
- Better organization of contribution-related content
Impact
- Lower Barrier to Entry: New contributors have clear guidance on getting started
- Better Engagement: Clear communication channels encourage participation
- Faster Onboarding: Developers can set up and contribute more quickly
- Community Growth: More accessible documentation helps grow the contributor base
This was part of a larger effort (issue #6124) to improve PipeCD's contributor experience, which also included guides for plugins and blogs.
Review Process
The PR went through multiple iterations with feedback from maintainers Warashi, khanhtc1202, and t-kikuc before being merged by eeshaanSA. The thorough review ensured the documentation was accurate and helpful.
Links: Pull Request #6399 • Issue #6124 • Repository