Contributing to this project ---------------------------- This project accepts contributions. In order to contribute, you should pay attention to a few things: 1 - your code must follow the coding style rules 2 - the format of the submission must be GitHub pull requests 3 - your work must be signed Coding Style: ------------- The LXC project generally follows the Linux kernel coding style. However there are a few differences, these are outlined it CODING_STLYE.md The Linux kernel coding style guide can be found within the kernel tree: Documentation/process/coding-style.rst It can be accessed online too: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html Submitting Modifications: ------------------------- The contributions must be GitHub pull requests. Licensing for new files: ------------------------ LXC is made of files shipped under a few different licenses. Anything that ends up being part of the LXC library needs to be released under LGPLv2.1+ or a license compatible with it (though the latter will only be accepted for cases where the code originated elsewhere and was imported into LXC). Language bindings for the libraries need to be released under LGPLv2.1+. Anything else (non-libraries) needs to be Free Software and needs to be allowed to link with LGPLv2.1+ code (if needed). LXC upstream prefers LGPLv2.1+ or GPLv2 for those. When introducing a new file into the project, please make sure it has a copyright header making clear under which license it's being released and if it doesn't match the criteria described above, please explain your decision on the lxc-devel mailing-list when submitting your patch. Developer Certificate of Origin: -------------------------------- To improve tracking of contributions to this project we will use a process modeled on the modified DCO 1.1 and use a "sign-off" procedure. The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for the patch, which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have the right to pass it on as an open-source patch. The rules are pretty simple: if you can certify the below: By making a contribution to this project, I certify that: (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I have the right to submit it under the open source license indicated in the file; or (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source License and I have the right under that license to submit that work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part by me, under the same open source license (unless I am permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated in the file; or (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified it. (d) The contribution is made free of any other party's intellectual property claims or rights. (e) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution are public and that a record of the contribution (including all personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with this project or the open source license(s) involved. then you just add a line saying Signed-off-by: Random J Developer You can do it by using option -s or --signoff when you commit git commit --signoff ... using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.) In addition we support the following DCOs which maintainers can use to indicate that a patch is acceptable: Acked-by: Random J Developer Reviewed-by: Random J Developer If you are contributing as a group who is implementing a feature together such that it cannot be reasonably attributed to a single developer please use: Co-developed-by: Random J Developer 1 Co-developed-by: Random J Developer 2 AI Generated Code: ------------------ Substantially AI generated code is not welcome. There are several reasons for this. First, it violates the "The contribution was created in whole or in part by me" statement of DCO. Second, the licensing implications are not yet clear. Thirdly, we expect anyone who submits code to fully understand what they are submitting. Finally, we put a lot of time into reviewing patch submissions. Increasing the volume of code to be reviewed with autogenerated boilerplate drivel will take away time from more important reviews.