mirror of
https://github.com/RoboSats/robosats.git
synced 2024-12-15 03:46:24 +00:00
2e3a32705b
- Motivation
1) It is widely recognized that one of the main attack vectors for the Bitcoin network is the ability of states to control the fiat on/off-ramps.
2) While there exists peer-to-peer alternatives to centralized exchanges, these are rather technical, slow and more costly.
3) Most users prefer the convenience of a centralized exchange at the cost of a difficult of the risk for their privacy and a difficult initial setup (ID, selfie-video, etc).
- Opportunities
Using the Lightning Network and hodl invoices it is possible to create a more user friendly, faster and cheaper peer-to-peer market. This vision was first enacted by @grunch on the p2plnbot telegam bot project.
- Challenges
1) Ideally the seller hodl invoice and the payment to the buyer invoice would be atomic. Given that this is not technically possible, the proposed concept relies on the need of trust on the service provider.
There are reasons to believe that challenging centralized solutions both in user experience and cost is possible.
This commit adds a rough concept for thefrontend, backend and design.
This project, tentatively named RoboSats (short for Robotic Satoshis) and licensed at launch under AGPL3.0.
82 lines
4.5 KiB
Markdown
82 lines
4.5 KiB
Markdown
# Contributing to Robosats
|
|
|
|
Anyone is welcome to contribute to Robosats. If you're looking for somewhere to start contributing, check out the [good first issue](https://github.com/reckless-satoshi/robosats/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A"good+first+issue") list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This contributing guide is based on the [Bisq contributing guide](https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md). While the scope and complexity of RoboSats is more managable, following best practices is free.
|
|
|
|
## Communication Channels
|
|
|
|
Most communication about RoboSats happens on the main Telegram group. However public community driven support is available in other languages.
|
|
* EN [t.me/robosats](https://t.me/robosats) (main)
|
|
* ES [t.me/robosats_es](https://t.me/robosats_es)
|
|
* RU [t.me/robosats_ru](https://t.me/robosats_ru)
|
|
* PT [t.me/robosats_pt](https://t.me/robosats_pt)
|
|
* CN [t.me/robosats_cn](https://t.me/robosats_cn)
|
|
|
|
Discussion about code changes happens in GitHub issues and pull requests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Contributor Workflow
|
|
|
|
All RoboSats contributors submit changes via pull requests. The workflow is as follows:
|
|
|
|
- Fork the repository
|
|
- Create a topic branch from the `master` branch
|
|
- Commit patches
|
|
- Squash redundant or unnecessary commits
|
|
- Submit a pull request from your topic branch back to the `master` branch of the main repository
|
|
- Make changes to the pull request if reviewers request them and request a re-review
|
|
|
|
Pull requests should be focused on a single change. Do not mix, for example, refactorings with a bug fix or implementation of a new feature. This practice makes it easier for fellow contributors to review each pull request.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Reviewing Pull Requests
|
|
|
|
Robosats follows the review workflow established by the Bitcoin Core project. The following is adapted from the [Bitcoin Core contributor documentation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#peer-review):
|
|
|
|
Anyone may participate in peer review which is expressed by comments in the pull request. Typically reviewers will review the code for obvious errors, as well as test out the patch set and opine on the technical merits of the patch. Project maintainers take into account the peer review when determining if there is consensus to merge a pull request (remember that discussions may have been spread out over GitHub and Telegram). The following language is used within pull-request comments:
|
|
|
|
- `ACK` means "I have tested the code and I agree it should be merged";
|
|
- `NACK` means "I disagree this should be merged", and must be accompanied by sound technical justification. NACKs without accompanying reasoning may be disregarded;
|
|
- `utACK` means "I have not tested the code, but I have reviewed it and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged";
|
|
- `Concept ACK` means "I agree in the general principle of this pull request";
|
|
- `Nit` refers to trivial, often non-blocking issues.
|
|
|
|
Please note that Pull Requests marked `NACK` and/or GitHub's `Change requested` are closed after 30 days if not addressed.
|
|
|
|
## Compensation
|
|
|
|
At the moment RoboSats is a young and unfunded project. However, when launched it might be able to fund development with fee revenue. Please contact the team lead for development (@reckless-satoshi) upfront if you want to get compensated for your contributions.
|
|
|
|
## Style and Coding Conventions
|
|
|
|
### Configure Git user name and email metadata
|
|
|
|
See https://help.github.com/articles/setting-your-username-in-git/ for instructions.
|
|
|
|
### Write well-formed commit messages
|
|
|
|
From https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/#seven-rules:
|
|
|
|
1. Separate subject from body with a blank line
|
|
2. Limit the subject line to 50 characters (*)
|
|
3. Capitalize the subject line
|
|
4. Do not end the subject line with a period
|
|
5. Use the imperative mood in the subject line
|
|
6. Wrap the body at 72 characters (*)
|
|
7. Use the body to explain what and why vs. how
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Sign your commits with GPG
|
|
|
|
See https://github.com/blog/2144-gpg-signature-verification for background and
|
|
https://help.github.com/articles/signing-commits-with-gpg/ for instructions.
|
|
|
|
### Use an editor that supports Editorconfig
|
|
|
|
The [.editorconfig](.editorconfig) settings in this repository ensure consistent management of whitespace. Most modern editors support it natively or with plugin. See http://editorconfig.org for details.
|
|
|
|
### Keep the git history clean
|
|
|
|
It's very important to keep the git history clear, light and easily browsable. This means contributors must make sure their pull requests include only meaningful commits (if they are redundant or were added after a review, they should be removed) and _no merge commits_. |