-# io.js Collaborator Guide
+# Node.js Collaborator Guide
**Contents**
-* Issues and Pull Requests
-* Accepting Modifications
- - Involving the TC
-* Landing Pull Requests
- - Technical HOWTO
+* [Issues and Pull Requests](#issues-and-pull-requests)
+* [Accepting Modifications](#accepting-modifications)
+ - [Involving the CTC](#involving-the-ctc)
+* [Landing Pull Requests](#landing-pull-requests)
+ - [Technical HOWTO](#technical-howto)
+ - [I Just Made a Mistake](#i-just-made-a-mistake)
+ - [Long Term Support](#long-term-support)
-This document contains information for Collaborators of the io.js
+This document contains information for Collaborators of the Node.js
project regarding maintaining the code, documentation and issues.
Collaborators should be familiar with the guidelines for new
## Issues and Pull Requests
Courtesy should always be shown to individuals submitting issues and
-pull requests to the io.js project.
+pull requests to the Node.js project.
Collaborators should feel free to take full responsibility for
managing issues and pull requests they feel qualified to handle, as
long as this is done while being mindful of these guidelines, the
-opinions of other Collaborators and guidance of the TC.
+opinions of other Collaborators and guidance of the CTC.
Collaborators may **close** any issue or pull request they believe is
-not relevant for the future of the io.js project. Where this is
+not relevant for the future of the Node.js project. Where this is
unclear, the issue should be left open for several days to allow for
-additional discussion. Where this does not yield input from io.js
+additional discussion. Where this does not yield input from Node.js
Collaborators or additional evidence that the issue has relevance, the
issue may be closed. Remember that issues can always be re-opened if
necessary.
## Accepting Modifications
-All modifications to the io.js code and documentation should be
+All modifications to the Node.js code and documentation should be
performed via GitHub pull requests, including modifications by
-Collaborators and TC members.
+Collaborators and CTC members.
All pull requests must be reviewed and accepted by a Collaborator with
sufficient expertise who is able to take full responsibility for the
may be landed given appropriate review. Where there is discussion
amongst Collaborators, consensus should be sought if possible. The
lack of consensus may indicate the need to elevate discussion to the
-TC for resolution (see below).
+CTC for resolution (see below).
All bugfixes require a test case which demonstrates the defect. The
test should *fail* before the change, and *pass* after the change.
-### Involving the TC
+All pull requests that modify executable code should be subjected to
+continuous integration tests on the
+[project CI server](https://ci.nodejs.org/).
-Collaborators may opt to elevate pull requests or issues to the TC for
-discussion by assigning the ***tc-agenda*** tag. This should be done
+### Involving the CTC
+
+Collaborators may opt to elevate pull requests or issues to the CTC for
+discussion by assigning the ***ctc-agenda*** tag. This should be done
where a pull request:
- has a significant impact on the codebase,
- has failed to reach consensus amongst the Collaborators who are
actively participating in the discussion.
-The TC should serve as the final arbiter where required.
+The CTC should serve as the final arbiter where required.
## Landing Pull Requests
- A `Reviewed-By: Name <email>` line for yourself and any
other Collaborators who have reviewed the change.
-- A `PR-URL:` line that references the full GitHub URL of the original
+- A `PR-URL:` line that references the *full* GitHub URL of the original
pull request being merged so it's easy to trace a commit back to the
conversation that led up to that change.
-- A `Fixes: X` line, where _X_ is either includes the full GitHub URL
+- A `Fixes: X` line, where _X_ either includes the *full* GitHub URL
for an issue, and/or the hash and commit message if the commit fixes
a bug in a previous commit. Multiple `Fixes:` lines may be added if
appropriate.
+Review the commit message to ensure that it adheres to the guidelines
+outlined in the [contributing](https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#step-3-commit) guide.
+
See the commit log for examples such as
-[this one](https://github.com/nodejs/io.js/commit/b636ba8186) if unsure
+[this one](https://github.com/nodejs/node/commit/b636ba8186) if unsure
exactly how to format your commit messages.
Additionally:
Apply external patches
```text
-$ curl -L https://github.com/nodejs/io.js/pull/xxx.patch | git am --whitespace=fix
+$ curl -L https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/xxx.patch | git am --whitespace=fix
```
Check and re-review the changes
$ git push origin master
```
-### I just made a mistake
+### I Just Made a Mistake
With `git`, there's a way to override remote trees by force pushing
(`git push -f`). This should generally be seen as forbidden (since
you're rewriting history on a repository other people are working
against) but is allowed for simpler slip-ups such as typos in commit
-messages. However, you are only allowed to force push to any io.js
+messages. However, you are only allowed to force push to any Node.js
branch within 10 minutes from your original push. If someone else
pushes to the branch or the 10 minute period passes, consider the
commit final.
+
+### Long Term Support
+
+#### What is LTS?
+
+Long Term Support (often referred to as *LTS*) guarantees application developers
+a 30 month support cycle with specific versions of Node.js.
+
+You can find more information [in the full LTS plan](https://github.com/nodejs/lts#lts-plan).
+
+#### How does LTS work?
+
+Once a stable branch enters LTS, changes in that branch are limited to bug
+fixes, security updates, possible npm updates, documentation updates, and
+certain performance improvements that can be demonstrated to not break existing
+applications. Semver-minor changes are only permitted if required for bug fixes
+and then only on a case-by-case basis with LTS WG and possibly Core Technical
+Committee (CTC) review. Semver-major changes are permitted only if required for
+security related fixes.
+
+Once a stable branch moves into Maintenance mode, only **critical** bugs,
+**critical** security fixes, and documentation updates will be permitted.
+
+#### Landing semver-minor commits in LTS
+
+The default policy is to not land semver-minor or higher commits in any LTS
+branch. However, the LTS WG or CTC can evaluate any individual semver-minor
+commit and decide whether a special exception ought to be made. It is
+expected that such exceptions would be evaluated, in part, on the scope
+and impact of the changes on the code, the risk to ecosystem stability
+incurred by accepting the change, and the expected benefit that landing the
+commit will have for the ecosystem.
+
+Any collaborator who feels a semver-minor commit should be landed in an LTS
+branch should attach the `lts-agenda` label to the pull request. The LTS WG
+will discuss the issue and, if necessary, will escalate the issue up to the
+CTC for further discussion.
+
+#### How are LTS Branches Managed?
+
+There are currently three LTS branches: `v4.x`, `v0.10`, and `v0.12`. Each
+of these is paired with a "staging" branch: `v4.x-staging`, `v0.10-staging`,
+and `v0.12-staging`.
+
+As commits land in `master`, they are cherry-picked back to each staging
+branch as appropriate. If the commit applies only to the LTS branch, the
+PR must be opened against the *staging* branch. Commits are selectively
+pulled from the staging branch into the LTS branch only when a release is
+being prepared and may be pulled into the LTS branch in a different order
+than they were landed in staging.
+
+Any collaborator may land commits into a staging branch, but only the release
+team should land commits into the LTS branch while preparing a new
+LTS release.
+
+#### How can I help?
+
+When you send your pull request, consider including information about
+whether your change is breaking. If you think your patch can be backported,
+please feel free to include that information in the PR thread.
+
+Several LTS related issue and PR labels have been provided:
+
+* `lts-watch-v4.x` - tells the LTS WG that the issue/PR needs to be considered
+ for landing in the `v4.x-staging` branch.
+* `lts-watch-v0.10` - tells the LTS WG that the issue/PR needs to be considered
+ for landing in the `v0.10-staging` branch.
+* `lts-watch-v0.12` - tells the LTS WG that the issue/PR needs to be considered
+ for landing in the `v0.12-staging` branch.
+* `land-on-v4.x` - tells the release team that the commit should be landed
+ in a future v4.x release
+* `land-on-v0.10` - tells the release team that the commit should be landed
+ in a future v0.10 release
+* `land-on-v0.12` - tells the release team that the commit should be landed
+ in a future v0.12 release
+
+Any collaborator can attach these labels to any PR/issue. As commits are
+landed into the staging branches, the `lts-watch-` label will be removed.
+Likewise, as commits are landed in a LTS release, the `land-on-` label will
+be removed.
+
+Collaborators are encouraged to help the LTS WG by attaching the appropriate
+`lts-watch-` label to any PR that may impact an LTS release.
+
+#### How is an LTS release cut?
+
+When the LTS working group determines that a new LTS release is required,
+selected commits will be picked from the staging branch to be included in the
+release. This process of making a release will be a collaboration between the
+LTS working group and the Release team.
projects / platform / upstream / nodejs.git / blobdiff