Add community infrastructure: issue + PR templates, CoC

Gitea issue templates (.gitea/issue_template/): - bug.yml: structured form requiring version, environment, what-happened, repro steps, expected, optional logs. Routes security reports to security@librete.ch instead of public issues. - feature.yml: prompts for the underlying problem before the proposed solution, plus alternatives and out-of-scope. Pull request template (.gitea/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md): checklist for tests, lint, manual exercise, docs, and changelog. Asks for explicit reviewer notes so trade-offs surface in the PR description rather than being lost in chat. CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md: links to Contributor Covenant 2.1 verbatim rather than inlining; documents scope, reporting address (conduct@librete.ch), and points enforcement at the Covenant's own Enforcement Guidelines. README links the docs/ tree, CONTRIBUTING, and the CoC so new contributors find the entry points. Closes #31. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-28 23:18:10 +02:00
parent 84a2116bc5
commit 62ef8be966
5 changed files with 166 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+## Summary
+
+What does this PR change, and why?
+
+## Linked issue
+
+Closes #
+
+## Changes
+
+- 
+
+## Testing
+
+- [ ] `make test` passes locally
+- [ ] `make lint` passes locally
+- [ ] Added or updated tests for the changed behaviour
+- [ ] Manually exercised the affected flow (frontend / API / etc.)
+
+## Documentation
+
+- [ ] Updated relevant docs in `docs/`
+- [ ] Updated `CHANGELOG.md` if user-visible
+- [ ] No documentation change needed
+
+## Notes for reviewers
+
+Anything you want a reviewer to look at specifically? Trade-offs
+considered? Migrations to flag?
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+name: Bug report
+about: Something is broken or doesn't work as documented
+labels: ["bug"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Thanks for taking the time to file a bug. Please fill in
+        as much of the form as you can — the more concrete the
+        report, the faster we can fix it.
+
+        For security issues, **do not** open a public issue.
+        Email `security@librete.ch` instead.
+  - type: input
+    id: version
+    attributes:
+      label: librenotes version
+      description: Output of `librenotes version` or the Docker image tag.
+      placeholder: v0.1.0
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: input
+    id: environment
+    attributes:
+      label: Environment
+      description: Browser + OS for frontend bugs; OS + Go version for backend bugs.
+      placeholder: Firefox 124 on macOS 14 / Go 1.22 on Debian 12
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: what-happened
+    attributes:
+      label: What happened?
+      description: A clear, concrete description of the bug.
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: reproduce
+    attributes:
+      label: Steps to reproduce
+      description: Numbered steps from a clean starting state.
+      placeholder: |
+        1. Sign in as a new user.
+        2. Create a note named "Test".
+        3. Click the toggle.
+        4. ...
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: expected
+    attributes:
+      label: Expected behaviour
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: logs
+    attributes:
+      label: Relevant logs / network traces
+      description: Any server logs, browser console errors, or HAR snippets.
+      render: shell
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+name: Feature request
+about: Suggest a new capability or improvement
+labels: ["enhancement"]
+body:
+  - type: markdown
+    attributes:
+      value: |
+        Thanks for proposing a feature. Before opening a request,
+        please skim the open issues to see if it already exists.
+  - type: textarea
+    id: problem
+    attributes:
+      label: What problem does this solve?
+      description: |
+        Describe the user need first, not the implementation.
+        "I can't find old notes when I have hundreds" is more
+        useful than "Add full-text search."
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: proposal
+    attributes:
+      label: Proposed solution
+      description: How would you like it to work?
+    validations:
+      required: true
+  - type: textarea
+    id: alternatives
+    attributes:
+      label: Alternatives considered
+      description: What other approaches did you think about, and why are they worse?
+  - type: textarea
+    id: scope
+    attributes:
+      label: Scope
+      description: |
+        Out of scope is just as useful as in scope. What does
+        this proposal NOT include?