From 24a627f6b536106d45e460e1bb186dec4069e81f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michael Tautschnig <tautschn@amazon.com> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:22:07 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add review guidelines Extends committee membership information with guidance on what is expected of committee members. --- doc/src/general-rules.md | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/src/general-rules.md b/doc/src/general-rules.md index b56ddc7e7d778..131f7dc1e0753 100644 --- a/doc/src/general-rules.md +++ b/doc/src/general-rules.md @@ -92,3 +92,18 @@ members = [ + "rahulku" ] ``` + +Committee members are expected to contribute by reviewing pull requests (all +pull requests review approvals from at least two committee members before they +can be merged). +Reviews of solutions towards challenges should consider at least the following aspects: + +1. Does the pull request implement a solution that respects/meets the success + criteria of the challenge? +2. Do the contracts and harnesses incorporate the safety conditions stated in + the documentation (from comments in the code and Rust book)? Note that we + currently focus on safety verification. Pre- and post-conditions towards + functional correctness are acceptable as long as they do not negatively + impact verification of safety, such as over-constraining input values. +3. Is the contributed code of adequate quality and idiomatic (to the best of the + committee member's knowledge).