Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
117 lines (83 loc) · 6.5 KB

REVIEWING.md

File metadata and controls

117 lines (83 loc) · 6.5 KB
Raw

Reviewing Daytona Content Programme Contributions

Thank you for participating in the review process of the Daytona Content Programme! This document outlines the streamlined procedures and best practices for reviewing contributions to our repository. By following these standards, we ensure that all content maintains high quality, consistency, and aligns with our program's objectives.

Table of Contents

Role of a Reviewer

As a reviewer, your primary responsibilities include:

  • Evaluating the submitted content for quality, accuracy, and adherence to guidelines.
  • Providing constructive feedback to authors to help improve their contributions.
  • Ensuring consistency and alignment with the Daytona Content Programme's standards.
  • Facilitating the smooth publication of high-quality content.

Reviewing Process

  1. Assignment: Reviewers are assigned to pull requests (PRs) based on their expertise and availability.
  2. Initial Assessment: Conduct a preliminary review to check for completeness and basic adherence to submission guidelines.
  3. Detailed Review: Evaluate the content in-depth, focusing on quality, accuracy, and replicability.
  4. Feedback Provision: Leave detailed comments and suggestions for improvement.
  5. Final Assessment: After revisions, perform a final check to ensure all feedback has been addressed.
  6. Approval: Approve the PR for merging if it meets all standards.

Review Guidelines

Content Quality

  • Relevance: Ensure the content is relevant to the Daytona ecosystem and aligns with the programme's objectives.
  • Originality: Verify that the content is original and free from plagiarism.
  • Depth: Check that the content provides comprehensive coverage of the topic, offering valuable insights and information.

Replicability and Accuracy

  • Replicability: For how-to articles and guides, ensure that all steps are clear, complete, and can be followed by the reader without confusion. Test the instructions yourself if possible.
  • Accuracy: Verify that all factual information is correct. Cross-check data points, statistics, and references to ensure their validity.
  • References: Ensure that all claims are supported by reliable sources and that references are properly cited.

Adherence to Guidelines

  • Contribution Guidelines: Ensure that the content adheres to the Contributing.md guidelines. Avoid repeating instructions here; instead, reference the relevant sections.
  • Naming Conventions and Formatting: Confirm that naming conventions and formatting follow the established standards as outlined in the Contributing.md.

Review Checklist

Before finalizing your review, ensure the following checklist items are addressed:

  • Template Usage: Correct template used (articles, guides, etc.).
  • File Naming: Proper YYYYMMDD_title_of_the_content.md format.
  • Content Quality: Original, relevant, and in-depth content.
  • Replicability: Steps are clear and can be followed by the reader.
  • Accuracy: All facts verified and sources cited.
  • Adherence to Guidelines: Compliance with Contributing.md.
  • Review Checklist: All items in this checklist have been addressed.

Providing Feedback

When providing feedback to authors:

  • Be Constructive: Offer clear, actionable suggestions for improvement.
  • Be Specific: Point out exact sections or lines that need attention.
  • Be Respectful: Maintain a professional and respectful tone, even when pointing out issues.
  • Encourage: Highlight what the author did well to motivate and guide them.

Example Feedback:

Great introduction! It sets the stage effectively for AI engineers. However, in the "Step 2: Set Up Your Dev Container" section, the devcontainer.json configuration could include additional comments explaining each field for better understanding.

Approval and Merging

Once a PR meets all the review criteria:

  1. Final Verification: Ensure all checklist items are satisfied and feedback has been addressed.
  2. Approval: Approve the PR using GitHub’s review tools.
  3. Merging: Merge the PR into the main branch, following repository merge protocols.
  4. Publication Notification: Inform the author of the publication date and any next steps.

Handling Revisions

If a PR requires revisions:

  1. Request Changes: Use GitHub’s review tools to request specific changes.
  2. Detail Required Revisions: Clearly outline what needs to be addressed.
  3. Monitor Progress: Keep track of the revisions and provide additional feedback if necessary.
  4. Re-Review: Once revisions are made, perform a re-review to ensure all issues are resolved.

Conflict Resolution

In cases of disagreements or conflicts during the review process:

  1. Open Communication: Encourage open and respectful dialogue between the reviewer and the author.
  2. Seek Consensus: Aim to reach a mutual agreement on necessary changes.
  3. Involve Maintainers: If consensus cannot be reached, involve repository maintainers to mediate and make final decisions.
  4. Document Decisions: Keep a record of discussions and decisions for future reference.

Resources

By adhering to this REVIEWING.md process, we ensure that all contributions to the Daytona Content Programme are of the highest quality and provide valuable insights to our community. Thank you for your dedication and commitment to maintaining excellence!