Skip to content

Community Guidelines

Jump to bottom
Dragon edited this page Dec 23, 2025 · 1 revision

Community Guidelines

Version 2.0 · Last updated: 12/23/2025

Our Philosophy

NaviDuck is built on the belief that technology should be accessible, transparent, and collaborative. We're not just building software—we're building a community of developers, users, and enthusiasts who believe in open, privacy-respecting tools.

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│        Our Core Community Values            │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│  🔓 Openness and Transparency              │
│  👥 Respect and Inclusion                  │
│  🔧 Practical Problem Solving              │
│  📚 Knowledge Sharing                      │
│  🛡️ Privacy by Design                      │
│  🎯 Focus on User Value                    │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Participation Tiers

👑 Core Maintainers

  • Responsibilities: Code architecture, major decisions, release management
  • Requirements: Deep understanding of the codebase, consistent contributions
  • Current: DAPOWER99 (founder)

🛠️ Active Contributors

  • Role: Regular code contributions, issue triage, documentation
  • Path: 3+ substantial PRs merged, active in discussions
  • Permissions: PR review, issue assignment, wiki edits

🔍 Occasional Contributors

  • Role: Bug fixes, small features, documentation updates
  • Path: Any merged contribution
  • Permissions: Issue comments, PR creation

💬 Community Members

  • Role: Users, testers, feedback providers
  • Path: Using NaviDuck and participating in discussions
  • Permissions: Issue creation, discussion participation

Communication Channels

Primary: GitHub

  • Issues: Bug reports, feature requests
  • Discussions: General questions, ideas, help
  • Pull Requests: Code contributions
  • Wiki: Documentation, guides

Golden Rules for Communication

  1. Search first - Check if your question/issue already exists
  2. Be specific - Include details, error messages, steps to reproduce
  3. Stay on topic - Keep discussions relevant to NaviDuck
  4. Assume good faith - Everyone is here to help or be helped

Contribution Workflow

Step 1: Finding Work

Issues → Look for "good first issue" or "help wanted" labels
          ↓
Identify an area matching your skills
          ↓
Comment "I'd like to work on this" to avoid duplication

Step 2: Development

Fork repository → Create feature branch
       ↓
Make changes following code style
       ↓
Test thoroughly (see Testing Standards)
       ↓
Update documentation if needed

Step 3: Submission

Create Pull Request with template
       ↓
Link related issues
       ↓
Describe changes clearly
       ↓
Wait for review (typically 2-3 days)

Pull Request Requirements

  • ✅ Follows code style guide
  • ✅ Includes tests for new features
  • ✅ Updates documentation
  • ✅ Passes existing tests
  • ✅ Single focus (one feature/fix per PR)

Code Review Standards

What Reviewers Look For

# ✅ Good contributions
def new_feature():
    """Clear purpose and documentation."""
    # Clean, readable code
    # Handles edge cases
    # Follows existing patterns
    pass

# ❌ Needs improvement
def messy_code():  # No docstring
    # Complex one-liners
    # Magic numbers
    # Doesn't match style
    pass

Review Response Times

  • Urgent security fixes: <24 hours
  • Bug fixes: 2-3 days
  • Features: 3-5 days
  • Large refactors: 5-7 days

How to Handle Feedback

  1. Don't take it personally - Feedback is about the code, not you
  2. Ask for clarification - If feedback isn't clear, ask questions
  3. Explain your reasoning - If you disagree, explain why
  4. Make requested changes - Update your PR promptly
  5. Thank reviewers - Acknowledge their time and input

Issue Management

Creating Issues

## Expected Behavior
What should happen

## Actual Behavior
What actually happens

## Steps to Reproduce
1. Command: `search python`
2. See error: "CAPTCHA detected"
3. ...

## Environment
- OS: Windows 11
- Python: 3.9.7
- NaviDuck: 3.0.0

## Additional Context
Screenshots, logs, related issues

Issue Labels

  • bug: Something isn't working
  • enhancement: New feature or improvement
  • documentation: Docs need updating
  • good first issue: Great for new contributors
  • help wanted: Community help needed
  • security: Security-related issues
  • question: General questions

Response Expectations

  • Acknowledgement: Within 48 hours
  • Triage: Labeling within 3 days
  • Resolution: Depends on complexity
  • Updates: Regular status updates for ongoing issues

Decision Making Process

Types of Decisions

  • Technical: Implementation details, architecture
  • Feature: What to build next
  • Community: Guidelines, processes
  • Operational: Releases, maintenance

Decision Framework

Problem identified → Discussion opened
         ↓
Options proposed → Community feedback
         ↓
Consensus sought → Vote if needed
         ↓
Decision documented → Implemented

Voting Process

  • Who votes: Active contributors and above
  • Duration: 7 days minimum
  • Quorum: 3+ votes required
  • Majority: >50% for approval
  • Tiebreaker: Core maintainer decides

Conflict Resolution

Principles

  1. Address directly - Talk to the person first
  2. Focus on facts - Not personalities
  3. Seek understanding - Not winning
  4. Escalate if needed - To core maintainers

Unacceptable Behavior

  • Personal attacks or insults
  • Discrimination of any kind
  • Harassment in any form
  • Doxxing or sharing private information
  • Spamming or trolling

Resolution Steps

  1. Private discussion between parties
  2. Mediation by core maintainer if needed
  3. Temporary cooling-off period
  4. Formal warning if behavior continues
  5. Removal from community in extreme cases

Recognition & Credit

How We Give Credit

  • Contributors list in README
  • Release notes acknowledge contributions
  • Special thanks for significant help
  • Badge system for different contribution types

Contributor Badges

  • 🐛 Bug Hunter: Fixed critical bugs
  • 📚 Documentarian: Improved documentation
  • 🎨 Designer: UI/UX improvements
  • 🔧 Maintainer: Ongoing maintenance
  • 🚀 Feature Developer: Major features
  • 🛡️ Security Guardian: Security improvements

Celebrating Contributions

  • Monthly "Contributor Spotlight"
  • Annual contributor awards
  • Featured in release announcements
  • Social media shoutouts (with permission)

Documentation Standards

What Needs Documentation

  • All public APIs and classes
  • Configuration options
  • Installation and setup
  • Common workflows
  • Troubleshooting guides

Documentation Levels

  1. Code comments - How it works
  2. Docstrings - What it does
  3. README/Guide - How to use it
  4. Tutorials - Learning paths
  5. API Reference - Technical details

Documentation Review

  • Technical accuracy verified
  • Examples tested and working
  • Clear for intended audience
  • Consistent with existing docs

Testing & Quality Standards

Test Requirements

  • New features require tests
  • Bug fixes include regression tests
  • 80%+ test coverage maintained
  • Tests run on all supported platforms

Testing Protocol

Local testing → CI pipeline → Manual verification
     ↓               ↓               ↓
Pass all tests   All checks pass   User testing
     ↓               ↓               ↓
Ready for PR    Ready for review   Ready for merge

Quality Gates

  1. Code style - Passes black, flake8
  2. Type hints - mypy passes (where applicable)
  3. Tests - All pass, coverage maintained
  4. Documentation - Updated and clear
  5. Security - No obvious vulnerabilities

Release Process

Release Cadence

  • Patch releases: As needed for bugs
  • Minor releases: Every 1-2 months
  • Major releases: Every 6-12 months

Release Checklist

  • All tests passing
  • Documentation updated
  • Changelog written
  • Version numbers updated
  • Release notes prepared
  • Tag created and pushed
  • Announcement posted

Who Can Release

  • Patch: Any core maintainer
  • Minor: Core maintainer agreement
  • Major: Community discussion and approval

Mentorship Program

For New Contributors

  • Onboarding guide with first tasks
  • Mentor assignment for guidance
  • Regular check-ins for support
  • Celebration of first contribution

Mentor Responsibilities

  • Guide through contribution process
  • Review first few PRs carefully
  • Provide constructive feedback
  • Help navigate community norms

Getting a Mentor

  1. Comment on your first issue
  2. Ask in discussions channel
  3. Email core maintainers directly
  4. Attend community meetings

Community Meetings

Regular Events

  • Monthly check-in: First Monday of each month
  • Sprint planning: Before major releases
  • Retrospective: After each release
  • Office hours: Weekly for questions

Meeting Structure

  1. Agenda posted 24 hours in advance
  2. Notes taken and published
  3. Decisions documented
  4. Action items assigned

Virtual Meetups

  • Platform: Discord/Matrix (TBD based on community size)
  • Recording: Meetings recorded for those who can't attend
  • Transcription: Notes published publicly

Financial Transparency

Current Status

NaviDuck is currently:

  • 💰 No funding - Volunteer-driven
  • 🆓 Free to use - MIT licensed
  • 🌐 No ads - Never will have ads
  • 🔓 No tracking - Privacy focused

If Donations Are Accepted

  • 100% transparent reporting
  • Funds used for infrastructure only
  • No personal compensation
  • Community vote on fund usage

Sponsorship Policy

  • No exclusive sponsorships
  • Sponsors must align with values
  • No influence over development
  • Clear disclosure required

Moderation Team

Current Moderators

  • DAPOWER99 (founder and lead)

Moderation Principles

  • Transparency: Actions explained publicly
  • Consistency: Rules applied equally
  • Proportionality: Response matches offense
  • Appeal process: Fair chance to respond

Becoming a Moderator

  1. 6+ months active participation
  2. Demonstrated good judgment
  3. Community nomination
  4. Current moderator approval

Language & Accessibility

Language Policy

  • Primary language: English
  • Translations welcome for documentation
  • Use clear, simple language
  • Avoid jargon without explanation

Accessibility Commitments

  • CLI interface works with screen readers
  • Color schemes consider color blindness
  • Documentation in plain language
  • Responsive to accessibility feedback

Inclusive Language

  • Use gender-neutral terms
  • Avoid ableist language
  • Respectful of all cultures
  • Welcoming to non-native speakers

Success Metrics

How We Measure Success

  1. User growth - More people using NaviDuck
  2. Contribution diversity - New contributors joining
  3. Issue resolution time - Problems solved quickly
  4. User satisfaction - Feedback and engagement
  5. Code quality - Maintainable, clean codebase

Community Health Indicators

  • Low barrier to first contribution
  • Diverse contributor base
  • Respectful discussions
  • Steady feature development
  • Good documentation coverage

Feedback Loop

How We Improve

  • Monthly retrospectives - What's working, what's not
  • Annual survey - Community feedback
  • Contributor exit interviews - Why people leave
  • User feedback analysis - Patterns in issues

Changing These Guidelines

  1. Proposed change discussion
  2. Community feedback period (14 days)
  3. Vote if consensus not reached
  4. Update documentation
  5. Communicate changes widely

Emergency Protocol

Security Issues

  1. Report: security@ or private message to maintainers
  2. Assessment: Severity determined
  3. Fix: Developed privately
  4. Release: Coordinated disclosure
  5. Communication: Users notified

Critical Bugs

  1. Tag: critical label applied
  2. Priority: All hands on deck
  3. Fix: Rapid development
  4. Release: Patch immediately
  5. Notification: Users alerted

Maintainer Unavailability

  • Designated backups for each role
  • Decision escalation path documented
  • Emergency contact list maintained
  • Graceful degradation of processes

Long-term Vision

Community Goals

  1. Sustainable - Not dependent on single person
  2. Welcoming - Easy for anyone to contribute
  3. Impactful - Solving real problems
  4. Innovative - Pushing CLI browser boundaries

Success Looks Like

  • Multiple active maintainers
  • Regular community events
  • Strong onboarding process
  • Happy, engaged users
  • Continuous improvement

Final Words

NaviDuck is more than code—it's people working together to build something useful. These guidelines exist to make that collaboration smooth, respectful, and productive.

Remember: We're all here to learn, build, and help each other. Mistakes happen, questions are welcome, and everyone started somewhere.

Be excellent to each other.

Community Guidelines version: 2.0
Last updated: 12/23/2025

Clone this wiki locally