diff --git a/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yaml b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1f7a6c3 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +name: "Bug Report" +description: "Report a bug or unexpected behavior to help us improve" +title: "[BUG]: " +labels: ["bug"] +body: + - type: markdown + attributes: + value: | + ## ⚠️ Before You Begin + Please ensure you have: + - [ ] Searched existing issues to avoid duplicates + - [ ] Confirmed this is a bug, not a question or configuration problem + + - type: textarea + id: description + attributes: + label: "📋 Description" + description: "Provide a clear and concise description of the bug" + placeholder: "What happened? What did you expect to happen instead?" + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: reproduction + attributes: + label: "🔁 Steps to Reproduce" + description: "Step-by-step instructions to reproduce the issue" + placeholder: | + 1. Go to '...' + 2. Click on '....' + 3. Scroll down to '....' + 4. See error + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: expected + attributes: + label: "✅ Expected Behavior" + description: "What you expected to happen" + placeholder: "A clear description of what should happen..." + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: actual + attributes: + label: "❌ Actual Behavior" + description: "What actually happened" + placeholder: "Include error messages, stack traces, or unexpected outcomes..." + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: logs + attributes: + label: "📄 Logs / Screenshots" + description: | + Provide relevant logs, error messages, or screenshots. + For logs, please use a pastebin and share the URL. + **Remember to remove any sensitive information (API keys, passwords, etc.).** + placeholder: "Paste logs here or provide a Gist URL..." + validations: + required: false + + - type: markdown + attributes: + value: | + --- + ## 🖥️ Environment Details + Please fill out the relevant information below. + + - type: textarea + id: additional + attributes: + label: "📎 Additional Context" + description: "Any other information that might be relevant" + placeholder: | + - Database type and version (e.g., PostgreSQL 15, SQLite) + - Reverse proxy/CDN in use (e.g., Nginx, Cloudflare) + - Any custom configuration + - Related issues or PRs + validations: + required: false + + - type: checkboxes + id: checklist + attributes: + label: "✅ Submission Checklist" + description: "Please confirm the following before submitting" + options: + - label: "I have searched for existing issues (open and closed) that report the same problem" + required: true + - label: "I have provided clear steps to reproduce the issue" + required: true + - label: "I have included relevant logs or error messages (with sensitive info removed)" + required: false diff --git a/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yaml b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..74cf1bb --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +name: "Feature Request" +description: "Suggest a new feature or enhancement for this project" +title: "[FEATURE]: " +labels: ["enhancement"] +body: + - type: markdown + attributes: + value: | + ## ⚠️ Before You Begin + Please ensure you have: + - [ ] Searched existing issues (open and closed) to avoid duplicates + - [ ] Reviewed the [project documentation](https://git.vmn.su/max/vmn-ansible/wiki) for existing functionality + - [ ] Confirmed this is a feature request, not a bug or configuration question + + + - type: textarea + id: problem + attributes: + label: "🎯 Problem Statement" + description: "What problem does this feature solve? What can't you do today?" + placeholder: | + I'm always frustrated when... + Currently, it's hard/impossible to... + This feature would help me because... + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: solution + attributes: + label: "💡 Proposed Solution" + description: "Describe the solution you'd like to see" + placeholder: | + A clear description of what you want to happen. + If you have a specific API, UI, or implementation in mind, describe it here. + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: alternatives + attributes: + label: "🔄 Alternatives Considered" + description: "What alternative solutions or workarounds have you considered?" + placeholder: | + - Alternative A: ... + - Workaround B: ... + - Why these don't fully solve the problem + validations: + required: false + + - type: textarea + id: screenshots + attributes: + label: "📸 Screenshots" + description: "If you can, provide screenshots or diagrams of the proposed feature" + placeholder: "Drag and drop images or paste links..." + validations: + required: false + + - type: markdown + attributes: + value: | + --- + ## 🔧 Implementation Details (Optional) + The following sections are for contributors who want to implement this feature. + + - type: textarea + id: technical + attributes: + label: "⚙️ Technical Approach" + description: "If you have ideas about how to implement this, share them here" + placeholder: | + - Which components/modules would be affected? + - Any database schema changes? + - API design considerations? + validations: + required: false + + - type: textarea + id: acceptance + attributes: + label: "✅ Acceptance Criteria" + description: "What does 'done' look like for this feature?" + placeholder: | + - [ ] Feature works in the UI + - [ ] API endpoints are documented + - [ ] Tests are added + - [ ] Documentation is updated + validations: + required: false + + - type: dropdown + id: contribution + attributes: + label: "🤝 Are you willing to contribute this feature?" + description: "Knowing if you can help implement this helps us prioritize" + options: + - "Yes, I can contribute" + - "Yes, but I need guidance" + - "No, but I can test/review" + - "No, I'm just requesting" + validations: + required: true + + - type: checkboxes + id: checklist + attributes: + label: "✅ Submission Checklist" + description: "Please confirm the following before submitting" + options: + - label: "I have searched for existing issues (open and closed) that request the same feature" + required: true + - label: "I have explained the problem this feature solves" + required: true + - label: "I have described a concrete solution or direction" + required: true + - label: "I have considered alternatives and explained why they fall short" + required: false diff --git a/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/refactor.yaml b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/refactor.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..31dc5fe --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitea/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/refactor.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ +name: "Refactor Request" +description: "Propose a code restructuring or cleanup with no behavior change" +title: "[REFACTOR]: " +labels: ["refactoring"] +body: + - type: markdown + attributes: + value: | + ## ⚠️ Before You Begin + Please ensure you have: + - [ ] Searched existing issues (open and closed) to avoid duplicates + - [ ] Reviewed the [project documentation](https://git.vmn.su/max/vmn-ansible/wiki) for architecture guidelines + - [ ] Confirmed this is a refactor (code restructuring with NO behavior change), not a bug fix or new feature + + + - type: textarea + id: problem + attributes: + label: "🎯 Problem Statement" + description: "What pain points does the current code cause? Why is this refactor needed?" + placeholder: | + The current implementation is difficult to maintain because... + This code has accumulated technical debt due to... + I'm constantly frustrated when working with this module because... + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: scope + attributes: + label: "📂 Scope" + description: "Which files, modules, or components need refactoring? Be specific." + placeholder: | + - File paths: `src/auth/`, `internal/handler/` + - Component: `UserService` class + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: current-state + attributes: + label: "🔍 Current State" + description: "Describe the current code structure, its issues, and why it's problematic" + placeholder: | + - The function `processUser()` is 500+ lines long + - Duplicated logic across 3 different files + - Mixed concerns (business logic + HTTP handling) + - Poor test coverage makes changes risky + - Naming is unclear and inconsistent + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: proposed-changes + attributes: + label: "💡 Proposed Solution" + description: "What should the code look like after the refactor?" + placeholder: | + - Extract `processUser()` into smaller, focused functions + - Consolidate duplicated logic into a shared utility + - Separate business logic from HTTP handlers + - Introduce interfaces for better testability + - Rename variables and functions for clarity + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: constraints + attributes: + label: "🚫 Constraints" + description: "What must NOT change? Public APIs, behavior, backward compatibility, performance characteristics?" + placeholder: | + - All public APIs must remain identical + - Database schema must not change + - External behavior must be identical + - Response formats must stay the same + - Performance must not degrade + validations: + required: true + + - type: textarea + id: benefits + attributes: + label: "📈 Expected Benefits" + description: "What improvements will this refactor bring?" + placeholder: | + - Improved maintainability + - Better testability + - Reduced code duplication + - Clearer separation of concerns + - Easier onboarding for new contributors + validations: + required: false + + - type: textarea + id: risks + attributes: + label: "⚠️ Risks & Mitigations" + description: "What could go wrong, and how will you mitigate it?" + placeholder: | + - Risk: Regression bugs + Mitigation: Comprehensive test coverage before and after + - Risk: Large diff making code review difficult + Mitigation: Break into smaller, incremental PRs + validations: + required: false + + - type: textarea + id: alternatives + attributes: + label: "🔄 Alternatives Considered" + description: "What other approaches did you consider, and why did you reject them?" + placeholder: | + - Alternative A: Complete rewrite — rejected because too risky + - Alternative B: Gradual deprecation — rejected because too slow + validations: + required: false + + - type: dropdown + id: contribution + attributes: + label: "🤝 Are you willing to contribute this refactor?" + description: "Knowing if you can help implement this helps us prioritize" + options: + - "Yes, I can contribute" + - "Yes, but I need guidance" + - "No, but I can review" + - "No, I'm just suggesting" + validations: + required: true + + - type: checkboxes + id: checklist + attributes: + label: "✅ Submission Checklist" + description: "Please confirm the following before submitting" + options: + - label: "I have searched for existing issues (open and closed) that request the same refactor" + required: true + - label: "I have clearly explained the problem this refactor solves" + required: true + - label: "I have described the scope of the refactor (specific files/modules)" + required: false + - label: "I have identified what must NOT change (APIs, behavior, backward compatibility)" + required: false