Benny Joo
ab21c7f805
* feat: Cal.diy — community-driven MIT-licensed fork of Cal.com This squashed commit contains all Cal.diy changes applied on top of calcom/cal.com main: - Rebrand Cal.com to Cal.diy across the entire codebase - Remove Enterprise Edition (EE) features, license checks, and AGPL restrictions - Switch license from AGPL-3.0 to MIT - Remove docs/ directory (migrated to Nextra at cal.diy) - Remove dead code: org tests, EE tips, platform nav, premium username, SAML/SSO, etc. - Clean up .env.example for self-hosted Cal.diy - Update Docker image references to calcom/cal.diy - Update README, CONTRIBUTING.md, and issue templates for Cal.diy community fork - Add PR welcome bot for Cal.diy contributors - Fix API v2 breaking changes oasdiff ignore entries - Replace Blacksmith CI runners with default GitHub Actions 3893 files changed, 20789 insertions(+), 411020 deletions(-) Co-Authored-By: benny@cal.com <sldisek783@gmail.com> * refactor: remove org-specific /organizations/:orgId endpoints from API v2 atoms controllers (#1701) Co-authored-by: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * fix: revert Cal.diy Inc to Cal.com, Inc. in license files, copyright notices, and package metadata (#1702) Co-authored-by: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> * rip out org related comments in api v2 --------- Co-authored-by: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
1.6 KiB
1.6 KiB
title, impact, impactDescription, tags
| title | impact | impactDescription | tags |
|---|---|---|---|
| Address All Nits Before Merging | HIGH | Prevents codebase degradation over time | quality, code-review, standards |
Address All Nits Before Merging
Impact: HIGH
Don't let PRs through with a lot of nits just to avoid being "the bad person." This is precisely how codebases become sloppy over time. Code review is not about being nice. It's about maintaining the quality standards our infrastructure demands.
Incorrect approach:
Reviewer: "This variable name could be clearer, but it's fine I guess"
Reviewer: "We usually use early returns here, but this works"
Reviewer: "Approved with minor suggestions"
// PR merged with multiple small issues
Correct approach:
Reviewer: "Please rename `d` to `userData` for clarity"
Reviewer: "Please refactor to use early returns per our standards"
Reviewer: "Requesting changes - please address before merging"
// PR updated to meet all standards before merge
The principle: Every nitpick matters. Every pattern violation matters. Address them before merging, not after. We hold each other accountable for quality because cutting corners might feel faster in the moment, but it creates problems that slow everyone down later.
Make it normal to challenge poor decisions, respectfully:
- If someone says "let's just hard-code this for now," ask "what would it take to do it the proper way the first time?"
- If someone wants to commit untested code, push back
- If someone suggests copying and pasting instead of creating a proper abstraction, call it out respectfully
Reference: Cal.diy Engineering Blog