Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 5, 2024. It is now read-only.

docs: 许可证链接错误,访问404 #228

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 10, 2023

Conversation

elvismile
Copy link
Collaborator

本次提交包含什么范围

  • [fix]修复(对缺陷的修复)
  • [feat]功能(新功能、特性的开发)
  • [docs]文档(仅对当前版本的文档进行增加、完善和更新)
  • [pref]性能(改进性能的代码更改)
  • [refactor]重构(既不修复bug也不添加特性的代码更改)
  • [style]风格(不影响代码含义的更改(空白、格式化、缺少分号等)
  • [test]测试(添加缺失的测试或修改现有的测试)
  • [build]编译(影响构建系统或外部依赖的更改)
  • [ci]集成(对CI配置文件和脚本的更改)
  • [others]其他,请说明:

参考 https://www.conventionalcommits.org/zh-hans/v1.0.0/

关联的 ISSUE 编号(一行一个)

#227

@elvismile elvismile added bug 程序不能正常工作 document 补充或完善相关的文档 labels Jan 10, 2023
@elvismile elvismile added this to the 2023 Q1 milestone Jan 10, 2023
@elvismile elvismile self-assigned this Jan 10, 2023
@elvismile elvismile linked an issue Jan 10, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
4 tasks
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 4 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +2 -2
Percentile : 1.6%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.md : +2 -2

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@github-actions
Copy link

Unit Test Results

🟢  Tests Passed      |      ⏱️ 3.1s

📝 Total ✔️ Passed ❌ Failed ⚠️ Skipped
93 93 0 0

@github-actions
Copy link

@elvismile elvismile changed the title [doc] 许可证链接错误,访问404 docs: 许可证链接错误,访问404 Jan 10, 2023
@teacher-zhou teacher-zhou merged commit 5047d37 into master Jan 10, 2023
@teacher-zhou teacher-zhou deleted the bugfix/doc/readme_license_notfund branch January 10, 2023 10:45
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
bug 程序不能正常工作 document 补充或完善相关的文档 Extra Small release/skip size/XS
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[缺陷] readme.md 许可证链接错误
2 participants