Otherwise, before reporting a bug or requesting a new feature on the\nticket tracker, consider these points:
\nCheck that someone hasn’t already filed the bug or feature request by\nsearching or running custom queries in the ticket tracker.
Don’t use the ticket system to ask support questions. Use the\ndjango-users list or the #django IRC channel for that.
Don’t reopen issues that have been marked “wontfix” without finding consensus\nto do so on django-developers.
Don’t use the ticket tracker for lengthy discussions, because they’re\nlikely to get lost. If a particular ticket is controversial, please move the\ndiscussion to django-developers.
Well-written bug reports are incredibly helpful. However, there’s a certain\namount of overhead involved in working with any bug tracking system so your\nhelp in keeping our ticket tracker as useful as possible is appreciated. In\nparticular:
\nDo read the FAQ to see if your issue might\nbe a well-known question.
Do ask on django-users or #django first if you’re not sure if\nwhat you’re seeing is a bug.
Do write complete, reproducible, specific bug reports. You must\ninclude a clear, concise description of the problem, and a set of\ninstructions for replicating it. Add as much debug information as you can:\ncode snippets, test cases, exception backtraces, screenshots, etc. A nice\nsmall test case is the best way to report a bug, as it gives us a\nhelpful way to confirm the bug quickly.
Don’t post to django-developers only to announce that you have filed a\nbug report. All the tickets are mailed to another list, django-updates,\nwhich is tracked by developers and interested community members; we see them\nas they are filed.
To understand the lifecycle of your ticket once you have created it, refer to\nTriaging tickets.
\nIf your bug or feature request touches on anything visual in nature, there\nare a few additional guidelines to follow:
\nInclude screenshots in your ticket which are the visual equivalent of a\nminimal testcase. Show off the issue, not the crazy customizations\nyou’ve made to your browser.
If the issue is difficult to show off using a still image, consider\ncapturing a brief screencast. If your software permits it, capture only\nthe relevant area of the screen.
If you’re offering a patch which changes the look or behavior of Django’s\nUI, you must attach before and after screenshots/screencasts.\nTickets lacking these are difficult for triagers to assess quickly.
Screenshots don’t absolve you of other good reporting practices. Make sure\nto include URLs, code snippets, and step-by-step instructions on how to\nreproduce the behavior visible in the screenshots.
Make sure to set the UI/UX flag on the ticket so interested parties can\nfind your ticket.
We’re always trying to make Django better, and your feature requests are a key\npart of that. Here are some tips on how to make a request most effectively:
\nMake sure the feature actually requires changes in Django’s core. If your\nidea can be developed as an independent application or module — for\ninstance, you want to support another database engine — we’ll probably\nsuggest that you develop it independently. Then, if your project gathers\nsufficient community support, we may consider it for inclusion in Django.
First request the feature on the django-developers list, not in the\nticket tracker. It’ll get read more closely if it’s on the mailing list.\nThis is even more important for large-scale feature requests. We like to\ndiscuss any big changes to Django’s core on the mailing list before\nactually working on them.
Describe clearly and concisely what the missing feature is and how you’d\nlike to see it implemented. Include example code (non-functional is OK)\nif possible.
Explain why you’d like the feature. Explaining a minimal use case will help\nothers understand where it fits in, and if there are already other ways of\nachieving the same thing.
If there’s a consensus agreement on the feature, then it’s appropriate to\ncreate a ticket. Include a link the discussion on django-developers in the\nticket description.
\nAs with most open-source projects, code talks. If you are willing to write the\ncode for the feature yourself or, even better, if you’ve already written it,\nit’s much more likely to be accepted. Fork Django on GitHub, create a feature\nbranch, and show us your work!
\nSee also: Documenting new features.
\nWhenever possible, we strive for a rough consensus. To that end, we’ll often\nhave informal votes on django-developers about a feature. In these votes we\nfollow the voting style invented by Apache and used on Python itself, where\nvotes are given as +1, +0, -0, or -1. Roughly translated, these votes mean:
\n+1: “I love the idea and I’m strongly committed to it.”
+0: “Sounds OK to me.”
-0: “I’m not thrilled, but I won’t stand in the way.”
-1: “I strongly disagree and would be very unhappy to see the idea turn\ninto reality.”
Although these votes on django-developers are informal, they’ll be taken very\nseriously. After a suitable voting period, if an obvious consensus arises we’ll\nfollow the votes.
\nHowever, consensus is not always possible. If consensus cannot be reached, or\nif the discussion toward a consensus fizzles out without a concrete decision,\nthe decision may be deferred to the technical board.
\nInternally, the technical board will use the same voting mechanism. A\nproposition will be considered carried if:
\nThere are at least three “+1” votes from members of the technical board.
There is no “-1” vote from any member of the technical board.
Votes should be submitted within a week.
\nSince this process allows any technical board member to veto a proposal, a\n“-1” vote should be accompanied by an explanation of what it would take to\nconvert that “-1” into at least a “+0”.
\nVotes on technical matters should be announced and held in public on the\ndjango-developers mailing list.
\n