mirror of
https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskwarrior.git
synced 2025-06-26 10:54:26 +02:00
150 lines
7 KiB
Markdown
150 lines
7 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
title: How to Build Taskwarrior
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Satisfy the Requirements:
|
|
* CMake 3.0 or later
|
|
* gcc 7.0 or later, clang 6.0 or later, or a compiler with full C++17 support
|
|
* libuuid (if not on macOS)
|
|
* gnutls (optional)
|
|
* python 3 (optional, for running the test suite)
|
|
|
|
## Obtain and build code:
|
|
```
|
|
$ git clone --recursive https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskwarrior taskwarrior.git
|
|
$ cd taskwarrior.git
|
|
$ git checkout develop # Latest dev branch
|
|
$ git submodule init # This is now done by cmake as a test
|
|
$ git submodule update # Update the libhsared.git submodule
|
|
$ cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=debug . # debug or release. Default: neither
|
|
$ make VERBOSE=1 -j4 # Shows details, builds using 4 jobs
|
|
# Alternately 'export MAKEFLAGS=-j 4'
|
|
```
|
|
## Running Test Suite:
|
|
```
|
|
$ cd test
|
|
$ make VERBOSE=1 # Shows details
|
|
$ ./run_all # Runs all tests silently > all.log
|
|
$ ./problems # Enumerate test failures in all.log
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Note that any development should be performed using a git clone, and the current development branch.
|
|
The source tarballs do not reflect HEAD, and do not contain the test suite.
|
|
|
|
If you send a patch (support@gothenburgbitfactory.org), make sure that patch is made against git HEAD on the development branch.
|
|
We cannot apply patches made against the tarball source, or master.
|
|
|
|
|
|
# General Statement
|
|
|
|
This file is intended to convey the current efforts, priorities and needs of the code base.
|
|
It is for anyone looking for a way to start contributing.
|
|
Here are many ways to contribute that may not be obvious:
|
|
|
|
* Use Taskwarrior, become familiar with it, and make suggestions.
|
|
There are always ongoing discussions about new features and changes to existing features.
|
|
|
|
* Join us in the #taskwarrior IRC channel on freenode.net or libera.chat.
|
|
Many great ideas, suggestions, testing and discussions have taken place there.
|
|
It is also the quickest way to get help, or confirm a bug.
|
|
|
|
* Review documentation: there are man pages, online articles, tutorials and so on, and these may contain errors, or they may not convey ideas in the best way.
|
|
Perhaps you can help improve it.
|
|
Contact us - documentation is a separate effort from the code base, and includes all web sites, and all are available as git repositories.
|
|
|
|
* Take a look at the bug database, and help triage the bug list.
|
|
This is a review process that involves confirming bugs, providing additional data, information or analysis.
|
|
Bug triage is very useful and much needed.
|
|
You could check to see that an old bug is still relevant - sometimes they are not.
|
|
|
|
* Review the source code, and point out inefficiencies, problems, unreadable functions, bugs and assumptions.
|
|
|
|
* Fix a bug.
|
|
For this you'll need C++ and Git skills.
|
|
We welcome all bug fixes, provided the work is done well and doesn't create other problems or introduce new dependencies.
|
|
We recommend talking to us before starting.
|
|
Seriously.
|
|
|
|
* Add unit tests.
|
|
Unit tests are possibly the most useful contributions of all, because they not only improve the quality of the code, but prevent future regressions, therefore maintaining quality of subsequent releases.
|
|
Plus, broken tests are a great motivator for us to fix the causal defect.
|
|
You'll need Python skills.
|
|
|
|
* Add a feature.
|
|
Well, let's be very clear about this: adding a feature is not usually well-received, and if you add a feature and send a patch, it will most likely be rejected.
|
|
The reason for this is that there are many efforts under way, in various code branches.
|
|
There is a very good chance that the feature you add is either already in progress, or being done in a way that is more fitting when considering other work in progress.
|
|
So if you want to add a feature, please don't.
|
|
Start by talking to us, and find out what is currently under way or planned.
|
|
You might find that we've already rejected such a feature for some very good reasons.
|
|
So please check first, so we don't duplicate effort or waste anyone's time.
|
|
|
|
* Spread the word.
|
|
Help others become more effective at managing tasks.
|
|
|
|
* Encouragement.
|
|
Tell us what works for you, and what doesn't.
|
|
Tell us about your methodology for managing tasks.
|
|
It's all useful information.
|
|
|
|
* Request a feature.
|
|
This not only tells us that you think something is missing from the software, but gives us insights into how you use it.
|
|
Plus, you might get your feature implemented.
|
|
|
|
# Unit Tests Needed
|
|
|
|
There are always more unit tests needed.
|
|
More specifically, better unit tests are always needed.
|
|
The convention is that there are four types of unit test:
|
|
|
|
1. High level tests that exercise large features, or combinations of commands.
|
|
For example, dependencies.t runs through a long list of commands that test dependencies, but do so by using 'add', 'modify', 'done' and 'delete'.
|
|
|
|
2. Regression tests that ensure certain bugs are fixed and stay fixed.
|
|
These tests are named tw-NNNN.t where NNNN refers to the bug number.
|
|
While it is not worth creating tests for small fixes like typos, it is for logic changes.
|
|
|
|
3. Small feature tests.
|
|
When small features are added, we would like small, low-level feature tests named feature.t, with a descriptive name and focused tests.
|
|
|
|
4. Code tests.
|
|
These are tests written in C++ that exercise C++ objects, or function calls.
|
|
These are the lowest level tests.
|
|
It is important that these kind of tests be extensive and thorough, because the software depends on this code the most.
|
|
|
|
The tests are written in Python, Bash and C++, and all use TAP.
|
|
|
|
## Tests needed
|
|
|
|
* Take a look at the bug database (https://github.com/GothenburgBitFactory/taskwarrior/issues) and notice that many issues, open and closed, have the "needsTest" label.
|
|
These are things that we would like to see in the test suite, as regression tests.
|
|
|
|
All new unit tests should follow the test/template.t standard.
|
|
|
|
# Patches
|
|
|
|
Patches are encouraged and welcomed.
|
|
Either send a pull request on Github or email a patch to support@taskwarrior.org.
|
|
A good patch:
|
|
|
|
* Maintains the MIT license, and does not contain code lifted from other sources.
|
|
You will have written 100% of the code in the patch, otherwise we cannot maintain the license.
|
|
|
|
* Precisely addresses one issue only.
|
|
|
|
* Doesn't break unit tests.
|
|
This means yes, run the unit tests.
|
|
|
|
* Doesn't introduce dependencies.
|
|
|
|
* Is accompanied by new or updated unit tests, where appropriate.
|
|
|
|
* Is accompanied by documentation changes, where appropriate.
|
|
|
|
* Conforms to the prevailing coding standards - in other words, it should fit in with the existing code.
|
|
|
|
A patch may be rejected for violating any of the above rules, and more.
|
|
Bad patches may be accepted and modified depending on work load and mood.
|
|
It is possible that a patch may be rejected because it conflicts in some way with plans or upcoming changes.
|
|
Check with us first, before sinking time and effort into a patch.
|
|
|