+1

On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 2:32 AM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello world :-)
>
> Following the discussion thread
> (https://lists.apache.org/thread/o1r2b776y9o3dwytp7hb0x1w0gclsw8n)
> lets vote, standard 72h time closes on 2026-02-07  :-)
>
> I would like to copy Contributing Guide [1] to our documentation /
> contributing section [2] where some users may look first before the
> git repo.
>
> I would like to propose 4 changes before we do that:
>
> 1. "Contributing Guidelines" rename to "Contributing Guide" so we use
> coherent and shorter naming that would be also aligned with other
> open-source projects.
>
> 2. "[BREAKING]" mark change to "!" as proposed by Alan. This change
> was discussed before [3] and in line with Conventional Commits [4]
> (except we want "!" as first char for clarity). This still needs to be
> part of git commit and PR description as before.
>
> 3. Require "BREAKING CHANGE:" section in breaking changes description
> (as discussed in [3] and required by [4]) that will also contain Quick
> Fix instructions. As the description is part of git commit and PR it
> will not only help understand what changed but also how to quickly
> adapt / fix after change to someone impacted with best possible
> solution out of the box.
>
> 4. Reference Security documentation [5] in the Contributing Guide [1].
>
>
> To sum up (2) and (3) here is a proposition of point 1.13.9 update:
>
> Old version:
> """
> Breaking Change must be clearly marked with a [BREAKING] tag in the
> git commit topic and PR title that will propagate to Release Notes.
> """
>
> New version:
> """
> All Breaking Changes must be clearly marked both in Git commits and
> pull requests.
> 1. Put ! (exclamation mark) as first character of the each breaking
> git commit and PR title.
> 2. Put 'BREAKING CHANGE:' in the git commit and PR body with a brief
> change description and the quick-fix instructions.
> This helps users identify areas that need an update on their side,
> grep git logs, and auto-generate release notes.
> """
>
> Example? Recently we got cJSON related update, we use 1.7.10 release,
> but 1.7.19 is already out. I asked PR author if update to 1.7.19 is
> possible. Looking at the cJSON releases page [6] to check for breaking
> changes version 1.7.14 contains this kind of description and quick fix
> instructions, which may server as good example here:
>
> """
> Since v1.7.13 changed the stucture of linkedlist to improve the
> efficiency of adding item to array/object, array->child->prev now is
> point to tail node, this won't change any behavior except for backward
> through the linkedlist.
> The current backward through the linkedlist could be in this way:
>
> cJSON *last = ...; // the last is known
> cJSON *current_item = last;
> do {
>     current_item = current_item->prev;
> } while(current_item != last);
> """
>
> Why? Because it builds trust in the project, will help ourselves in
> the long-term maintenance (LTS), and to align with CRA / Cyber
> Resilience Act [7], SBOM [8], etc, that will soon become a mandatory
> requirement for commercial and industrial applications /
> certifications. I filled in a form [9] recently where this question
> was asked, so we would have this already in place :-)
>
> There is a separate discussion necessary for "secure development guide
> or security-relevant onboarding for new developers and maintainers".
> We have now a Security section in the documentation [5] with some
> hints and we may just extend it as dedicated section. We may want to
> reference Security documentation in the Contributing Guide too, thus
> my proposition for (4).
>
> Thank you :-)
> Tomek
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
> [2] https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/index.html
> [3] https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/16823
> [4] https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/
> [5] https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/security.html
> [6] https://github.com/DaveGamble/cJSON/releases
> [7] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/cra-reporting
> [8] https://www.cisa.gov/sbom
> [9]
> https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/CRA-Attestation-Survey-2026-FOSDEM
>
> --
> CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
>

Reply via email to