Docs proposal for bad / good examples in Frontend Guidelines
What does this MR do?
The Frontend Guidelines have several useful examples of what's bad and what's good practice at GitLab.
There is some inconsistency in the way
bad are ordered and presented.
To improve the reading experience and clarity, this MR proposes an harmonization of the way the examples are presented by following these tips:
- First Bad then Good:
Putting Good as first can let the reader skipping the Bad, therefore making it irrelevant. The aim is often comparing a legitimate code (the Bad is not wrong per se) versus offering a better or preferred option (Good).
- When only 1 Bad and 1 Good is given, use the same code block:
- When more than 1 Bad or 1 Good is given, use separated code blocks for each type: A clearer separation of the many examples helps the reader to go directly to the Good parts, if needed. Also, when possible, it's a great idea to briefly comment while something should be considered Bad.
- Better and Best can be considered part of the Good Code Block.
Author's checklist (required)
- Follow the Documentation Guidelines and Style Guide.
- If you have
developeraccess or higher (for example, GitLab team members or Core Team members)
Apply the documentation label, plus:
- The corresponding DevOps stage and group label, if applicable.
development guidelines when changing docs under
development guidelines and Documentation guidelines when changing docs under
- development guidelines and Description templates (.gitlab/*) when creating/updating issue and MR description templates.
- Assign the designated Technical Writer.
- Apply the documentation label, plus:
- Update the permissions table.
- Link docs to and from the higher-level index page, plus other related docs where helpful.
- Add GitLab's version history note(s).
- Add the product tier badge.
- Add/update the feature flag section.
If you're changing document headings, search
ee/app/views/*for old headings replacing with the new ones to avoid broken anchors.
1. Primary Reviewer
- Review by a code reviewer or other selected colleague to confirm accuracy, clarity, and completeness. This can be skipped for minor fixes without substantive content changes.
2. Technical Writer
- Optional: Technical writer review. If not requested for this MR, must be scheduled post-merge. To request for this MR, assign the writer listed for the applicable DevOps stage.
- Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the above reviews. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.
- Ensure a release milestone is set.
- If there has not been a technical writer review, create an issue for one using the Doc Review template.