bd4c7ce578
This PR cleans up the docs in a way to make them simpler to ingest by our [docs repo](https://gitea.com/gitea/gitea-docusaurus). 1. It includes all of the sed invocations our ingestion did, removing the need to do it at build time. 2. It replaces the shortcode variable replacement method with `@variable@` style, simply for easier sed invocations when required. 3. It removes unused files and moves the docs up a level as cleanup. --------- Signed-off-by: jolheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
49 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown
49 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
date: "2023-02-14T00:00:00+00:00"
|
|
title: "Guidelines for Refactoring"
|
|
slug: "guidelines-refactoring"
|
|
sidebar_position: 40
|
|
toc: false
|
|
draft: false
|
|
aliases:
|
|
- /en-us/guidelines-refactoring
|
|
menu:
|
|
sidebar:
|
|
parent: "contributing"
|
|
name: "Guidelines for Refactoring"
|
|
sidebar_position: 40
|
|
identifier: "guidelines-refactoring"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Guidelines for Refactoring
|
|
|
|
## Background
|
|
|
|
Since the first line of code was written at Feb 12, 2014, Gitea has grown to be a large project.
|
|
As a result, the codebase has become larger and larger. The larger the codebase is, the more difficult it is to maintain.
|
|
A lot of outdated mechanisms exist, a lot of frameworks are mixed together, some legacy code might cause bugs and block new features.
|
|
To make the codebase more maintainable and make Gitea better, developers should keep in mind to use modern mechanisms to refactor the old code.
|
|
|
|
This document is a collection of guidelines for refactoring the codebase.
|
|
|
|
## Refactoring Suggestions
|
|
|
|
* Design more about the future, but not only resolve the current problem.
|
|
* Reduce ambiguity, reduce conflicts, improve maintainability.
|
|
* Describe the refactoring, for example:
|
|
* Why the refactoring is needed.
|
|
* How the legacy problems would be solved.
|
|
* What's the Pros/Cons of the refactoring.
|
|
* Only do necessary changes, keep the old logic as much as possible.
|
|
* Introduce some intermediate steps to make the refactoring easier to review, a complete refactoring plan could be done in several PRs.
|
|
* If there is any divergence, the TOC(Technical Oversight Committee) should be involved to help to make decisions.
|
|
* Add necessary tests to make sure the refactoring is correct.
|
|
* Non-bug refactoring is preferred to be done at the beginning of a milestone, it would be easier to find problems before the release.
|
|
|
|
## Reviewing & Merging Suggestions
|
|
|
|
* A refactoring PR shouldn't be kept open for a long time (usually 7 days), it should be reviewed as soon as possible.
|
|
* A refactoring PR should be merged as soon as possible, it should not be blocked by other PRs.
|
|
* If there is no objection from TOC, a refactoring PR could be merged after 7 days with one core member's approval (not the author).
|
|
* Tolerate some dirty/hacky intermediate steps if the final result is good.
|
|
* Tolerate some regression bugs if the refactoring is necessary, fix bugs as soon as possible.
|