New contributor and not sure what to do? Want to help but just don’t know how\nto get started? This is the section for you.
\n\nStart with these easy tasks to discover Django’s development process.
\nSign the Contributor License Agreement
\nThe code that you write belongs to you or your employer. If your\ncontribution is more than one or two lines of code, you need to sign the\nCLA. See the Contributor License Agreement FAQ for a more thorough\nexplanation.
\nTriage tickets
\nIf an unreviewed ticket reports a bug, try and reproduce it. If you\ncan reproduce it and it seems valid, make a note that you confirmed the bug\nand accept the ticket. Make sure the ticket is filed under the correct\ncomponent area. Consider writing a patch that adds a test for the bug’s\nbehavior, even if you don’t fix the bug itself. See more at\nCommet puis-je aider à trier les tickets ?
\nLook for tickets that are accepted and review patches to build familiarity\nwith the codebase and the process
\nMark the appropriate flags if a patch needs docs or tests. Look through the\nchanges a patch makes, and keep an eye out for syntax that is incompatible\nwith older but still supported versions of Python. Run the tests and make sure they pass.\nWhere possible and relevant, try them out on a database other than SQLite.\nLeave comments and feedback!
\nGarder les anciens correctifs à jour
\nOftentimes the codebase will change between a patch being submitted and the\ntime it gets reviewed. Make sure it still applies cleanly and functions as\nexpected. Simply updating a patch is both useful and important! See more on\nSoumission de correctifs.
\nÉcrire de la documentation
\nDjango’s documentation is great but it can always be improved. Did you find\na typo? Do you think that something should be clarified? Go ahead and\nsuggest a documentation patch! See also the guide on\nÉcrire la documentation.
\n\nAs a newcomer on a large project, it’s easy to experience frustration. Here’s\nsome advice to make your work on Django more useful and rewarding.
\nPick a subject area that you care about, that you are familiar with, or\nthat you want to learn about
\nYou don’t already have to be an expert on the area you want to work on; you\nbecome an expert through your ongoing contributions to the code.
\nAnalyser le contexte et l’historique des tickets
\nTrac isn’t an absolute; the context is just as important as the words.\nWhen reading Trac, you need to take into account who says things, and when\nthey were said. Support for an idea two years ago doesn’t necessarily mean\nthat the idea will still have support. You also need to pay attention to who\nhasn’t spoken – for example, if an experienced contributor hasn’t been\nrecently involved in a discussion, then a ticket may not have the support\nrequired to get into Django.
\nStart small
\nIt’s easier to get feedback on a little issue than on a big one. See the\neasy pickings.
\nIf you’re going to engage in a big task, make sure that your idea has\nsupport first
\nThis means getting someone else to confirm that a bug is real before you fix\nthe issue, and ensuring that there’s consensus on a proposed feature before\nyou go implementing it.
\nBe bold! Leave feedback!
\nSometimes it can be scary to put your opinion out to the world and say « this\nticket is correct » or « this patch needs work », but it’s the only way the\nproject moves forward. The contributions of the broad Django community\nultimately have a much greater impact than that of any one person. We can’t\ndo it without you!
\nErr on the side of caution when marking things Ready For Check-in
\nIf you’re really not certain if a ticket is ready, don’t mark it as\nsuch. Leave a comment instead, letting others know your thoughts. If you’re\nmostly certain, but not completely certain, you might also try asking on IRC\nto see if someone else can confirm your suspicions.
\nWait for feedback, and respond to feedback that you receive
\nFocus on one or two tickets, see them through from start to finish, and\nrepeat. The shotgun approach of taking on lots of tickets and letting some\nfall by the wayside ends up doing more harm than good.
\nÊtre rigoureux
\nWhen we say « PEP 8, and must have docs and tests », we mean it. If a patch\ndoesn’t have docs and tests, there had better be a good reason. Arguments\nlike « I couldn’t find any existing tests of this feature » don’t carry much\nweight–while it may be true, that means you have the extra-important job of\nwriting the very first tests for that feature, not that you get a pass from\nwriting tests altogether.
\nThis ticket I care about has been ignored for days/weeks/months! What can\nI do to get it committed?
\nFirst off, it’s not personal. Django is entirely developed by volunteers\n(except the Django fellow), and sometimes folks just don’t have time. The\nbest thing to do is to send a gentle reminder to the django-developers\nmailing list asking for review on the ticket, or to bring it up in the\n#django-dev IRC channel.
\nI’m sure my ticket is absolutely 100% perfect, can I mark it as RFC\nmyself?
\nShort answer: No. It’s always better to get another set of eyes on a\nticket. If you’re having trouble getting that second set of eyes, see\nquestion 1, above.
\n