By contributing to GitLab Inc., You accept and agree to the following terms and conditions for Your present and future Contributions submitted to GitLab Inc. Except for the license granted herein to GitLab Inc. and recipients of software distributed by GitLab Inc., You reserve all right, title, and interest in and to Your Contributions. All Contributions are subject to the following DCO + License terms.
All Documentation content that resides under the docs/ directory of this repository is licensed under Creative Commons: CC BY-SA 4.0.
This notice should stay as the first item in the CONTRIBUTING.md file.
The following content is an extension of the GitLab contribution guidelines.
Currently we use a system of scoped labels to help us prioritize which MRs our team will review.
| Label | Meaning | Use Cases |
|---|---|---|
| ~"Review::P1" | Highest priority to review. | Indicates a merge request that might solve an urgent pain point for users, contributes to the strategic direction of Runner development as laid out by the Product team, or fixes a critical issue. A hard cap on the number of contributions labelled ~"Review::P1" is set at 3. |
| ~"Review::P2" | Important merge requests. | When a merge request is important, but has lower impact to customers when compared to merge requests labelled ~"Review::P1". |
| ~"Review::P3" | Default priority to review. | All incoming merge requests should default to this. |
Contributing new features that need new or updated .gitlab-ci.yml keywords
To execute a job, the GitLab instance processes the gitlab-ci.yml configuration
and creates a data transfer object, containing only data relevant to a job's
execution, that GitLab Runner then receives.
Because of this workflow, when you add a keyword that affects the execution of a job, you must make changes in both repositories: GitLab Runner and GitLab.
When a feature needs changes in both repositories, the GitLab Runner team can accept a merge request only if the feature has already been accepted for inclusion in the GitLab repository.
- Reviews in both repositories can happen in parallel.
- The GitLab project will always dictate and have authority over which keywords are added.
- The GitLab project maintainers determine what the behavior will ultimately be.
For this reason, before starting a review in the GitLab Runner project, the team requires confirmation that a keyword or a change to a keyword is likely to be accepted. This process helps save time and ensures that we end up with the best solution possible for the problem being solved.
Contributing new executors
We are no longer accepting or developing new executors for a few reasons listed below:
- Some executors require licensed software or hardware that GitLab Inc. doesn't have.
- Each new executor brings its own set of problems when it comes to testing it properly.
- Adding new executors can add new dependencies, which adds maintenance costs.
- Having a lot of executors adds to maintenance costs.
With GitLab 12.1, we introduced the custom executor, which will provide a way to create an executor of choice.
We're currently exploring how we can add builds for new and different hardware architectures. Adding and supporting new architectures brings added levels of complexity and may require hardware that GitLab Inc. doesn't have access to.
At the current time, new hardware architectures will only be considered if the following criteria are met:
- GitLab Inc. must be able to build and test for the new architecture on our Shared Runners on GitLab.com
- If you add support for the new architecture in the helper image, Docker must also support the architecture upstream
As we explore adding more architectures, other requirements may come up.
We are currently discussing the ability to provide builds for architectures that we don't have the ability to support and we welcome contributions to that discussion.
When submitting a Merge Request please remember that we use the Merge Request titles to generate entries
for the CHANGELOG.md file.
This one line will be the only thing a Runner administrator will see when reviewing
the changelog before deciding if an upgrade should be made or not. The administrator may not check the
MR description, list of changes, or diff which would give more context.
Please make the title clear, concise and informative. A title of Fixes bug would not be
acceptable, while Fix timestamp in docker executor job output would be acceptable.
We have some additional labels plus those defined in gitlab-ce workflow labels
- Additional subjects: ~cache, ~executors, ~"git operations"
- OS: ~"os::Linux" ~"os::macOS" ~"os::FreeBSD" ~"os::Windows"
- executor: ~"executor::docker" ~"executor::kubernetes" ~"executor::docker-machine" ~"executor::shell" ~"executor::parallels" ~"executor::virtualbox"
- For any follow-up issues created during code review the ~"follow-up" label should be added to keep track of it.