Skip to content

Mention we don't accept typofixes on internal docs and tests #926

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2025

Conversation

apiraino
Copy link
Contributor

@apiraino apiraino commented Aug 5, 2025

We routinely receive typofixes PRs (some are genuine, some are spam). We decline those that are on internal documentation (see rust#144863, rust#143729, rust#143315 etc.) or to our rust testsuite because they could cause regressions, see rust#136384 or rust#129867 etc.).

I'd like to add clear wording about this in our "How to start contributing guide", I think this is not mentioned anywhere. This is not to not keep out spam (for that we have other tools) but rather for guiding contributions better.

If this is approved, I would like to add the same wording also to the rustc-dev guide (for example here)

Feel free to improve my wording!

Opinions?

thanks

Note: the added newlines in the list make the list a bit easier on the eyes

Details

screenshot-20250805-115243

Rendered

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 5, 2025

r? @ehuss

rustbot has assigned @ehuss.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 5, 2025
@ehuss
Copy link
Contributor

ehuss commented Aug 5, 2025

r? Kobzol

@rustbot rustbot assigned Kobzol and unassigned ehuss Aug 5, 2025
Copy link
Member

@Kobzol Kobzol left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would maybe also mention "... and they are usually not worth the churn or review time", but this is good enough as it is.

@apiraino
Copy link
Contributor Author

apiraino commented Aug 5, 2025

I would maybe also mention "... and they are usually not worth the churn or review time", but this is good enough as it is.

Added the clause and ... fixed a typo (lol).

now squashing

@apiraino apiraino merged commit ab6531d into rust-lang:master Aug 5, 2025
1 check passed
@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 5, 2025
@apiraino apiraino deleted the no-typofixes-pls branch August 5, 2025 19:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants