Skip to content

Conventions based on #5 - #7

Open
skycatminepokie wants to merge 6 commits into
FabricMC:26.3from
skycatminepokie:conventions
Open

skycatminepokie wants to merge 6 commits into
FabricMC:26.3from
skycatminepokie:conventions

Conversation

@skycatminepokie

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Starting conventions, yay! Based on #5 , I think I addressed all the problems mentioned there. Though I did remove the bit about capitalization of in-game things.

Generally trying to help find something agreed-upon, I don't think I have any strong opinions on conventions.

I tried to make a stacked pull request, but GitHub said "hey you can't do that, your branch has to be in the same repo! no forks!"

Comment thread CONVENTIONS.md Resolved
Comment thread CONVENTIONS.md Resolved
Comment thread CONVENTIONS.md Resolved

@Thomas1034 Thomas1034 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems reasonable as a start for a conventions framework. I think it would be good to elaborate on some of the points, though. For instance, you might want to explain why the given positive examples are good and the given negative examples are bad. A brief paragraph should suffice. I also noticed and commented on a few possible typos; it would be good to resolve those for the sake of professionalism.

Obviously, I'm not an owner or current contributor to this project, so don't consider my comments or suggestions to be binding. However, I thought I'd chip in the two cents of a passing semi-stranger!

@skycatminepokie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

This seems reasonable as a start for a conventions framework. I think it would be good to elaborate on some of the points, though. For instance, you might want to explain why the given positive examples are good and the given negative examples are bad. A brief paragraph should suffice. I also noticed and commented on a few possible typos; it would be good to resolve those for the sake of professionalism.

Obviously, I'm not an owner or current contributor to this project, so don't consider my comments or suggestions to be binding. However, I thought I'd chip in the two cents of a passing semi-stranger!

Fixed all the typos mentioned. I'm not opposed to elaborating on why things are good/bad as far as what conventions they break, but explaining the motivation behind them might be out of scope.

Any second opinions - is mentioning the motivation behind conventions worthwhile?

@modmuss50 modmuss50 mentioned this pull request Nov 6, 2026
@skycatminepokie
skycatminepokie requested a review from a team as a code owner November 7, 2026 01:08

@modmuss50 modmuss50 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me, I dont think we should bikeshead this more than necessary, it can always be tweaked later.

@cassiancc cassiancc left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This all seems reasonable, and can be expanded later as necessary.

@Thomas1034 Thomas1034 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that looks good to me. I didn't see any overt and obvious errors or typos.

@NotNightSky NotNightSky left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me. It's simple and effective.

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.

5 participants