|With the addition of Contributing Guidelines, there is now a clear incentive to put your general and idiosyncratic guidelines into succinct prose.|
I have written what I think is a good set of guidelines, but there is a chicken-and-egg problem in that I don’t really have the following to test it on; on the other hand, it might very well have discouraged some people from posting borderline-useless project feedback.
In addition, my Travis continuous integration also automatically vets the pull request code on a very, very basic level, which is something akin to a second layer of defence against bad contributions.
Where else are there some guidelines that could be instructive to learn from with direct application to a GitHub project? I don’t think community guidelines like those by pg are relevant here, especially in the spirit of brevity.
Perhaps we could look into creating a CONTRIBUTING Bootstrap as a default template for writing your GitHub contribution guidelines?
What are your experiences? Especially those of you with very popular projects that have to straddle a deluge of feedback and scale accordingly?