CONTRIBUTING.md and Open Source Documentation (English)
Practice the vocabulary and structure of CONTRIBUTING.md files, code of conduct, and open-source community documentation.
0 / 25 completed
1 / 25
What is the primary purpose of a CONTRIBUTING.md file?
CONTRIBUTING.md guides potential contributors: how to set up a dev environment, the PR process, coding standards, how to report bugs, and what kinds of contributions are welcome.
2 / 25
What does 'first-time contributor friendly' mean in an open-source project?
First-time contributor friendliness is signaled by 'good first issue' labels, detailed onboarding docs, and a welcoming code of conduct. It lowers the barrier to entry for contributors unfamiliar with the codebase.
3 / 25
What is a CLA (Contributor License Agreement)?
A CLA transfers or licenses the intellectual property rights of a contribution to the project. It ensures the project maintainers have the legal right to include and distribute the contributed code.
4 / 25
Which sentence is an example of good CONTRIBUTING.md language for reporting bugs?
Good bug reporting guidance reduces duplicate issues and provides maintainers with the information they need to reproduce and fix bugs. Minimal reproducible examples are especially valuable.
5 / 25
What is the 'Code of Conduct' in an open-source project?
A Code of Conduct (commonly the Contributor Covenant) sets community behavior standards. It defines what constitutes harassment, how to report violations, and how maintainers will respond.
6 / 25
What does 'DCO (Developer Certificate of Origin)' require contributors to do?
The DCO is a lightweight alternative to a CLA. Contributors add 'Signed-off-by: Name ' to commits, certifying they wrote the code or have the right to submit it under the project's open-source license.
7 / 25
How would a maintainer politely decline a contribution that does not fit the project's scope?
Professional open-source communication thanks contributors, explains why the contribution is not accepted, and provides a path forward (opening a discussion). This maintains a welcoming community even when declining PRs.
8 / 25
What is a 'stale bot' in GitHub open-source projects?
Stale bots help maintainers manage large issue backlogs by automatically flagging inactive issues/PRs. Contributors must respond to the stale label to keep their issue or PR open.
9 / 25
Alice submitted a pull request to the AwesomeLib project. The PR includes a new function to calculate prime numbers, but the maintainer, Bob, comments: 'This is a great idea! However, it doesn't directly address our current API design goals for number processing. Could you explore refactoring existing functions to handle prime calculations more efficiently instead?' What is Bob's primary intention in this comment?
A: To reject
Alice's PR entirely and ask her to start a completely new project.
B: To politely suggest an alternative approach that aligns with the project's existing architecture and priorities, focusing on optimization rather than introducing a new function.
C: To request Alice provide a detailed technical specification of how her prime number calculation would integrate into the current system.
D: To express frustration that Alice hasn't already implemented the solution themselves and needs guidance.Bob isn't dismissing Alice's contribution outright. Instead, he's offering constructive feedback by suggesting a more aligned approach – improving existing code for efficiency – which is typical of open-source maintainers who want to ensure new contributions fit within the project's overall strategy and technical debt. Option A is too extreme; option C asks for unnecessary detail at this stage. Option D reflects frustration, not helpful guidance.10 / 25
Sarah is new to the OpenSourceWidget project and wants to contribute. She sends a Slack message saying, 'Hey team, I've written a script that automatically generates documentation for our API! It's really cool and will save us tons of time!' The project maintainer, David, responds with: 'Thanks for the suggestion, Sarah! We appreciate you thinking about improving our documentation. However, we're currently focused on stabilizing the core API and addressing critical bugs. Generating automated documentation is a nice-to-have feature, but it's not a priority right now.' What is David's primary concern in his response?David is prioritizing the project's immediate needs – bug fixes and API stability. He's not rejecting Sarah's idea outright but gently explaining that it doesn't fit within the current roadmap. Option A is too dismissive; option C accurately reflects his concern about priorities. Option D is a reasonable request, but not David's primary intention in this concise Slack exchange – he wants to steer Sarah towards a more appropriate contribution path.11 / 25
Bob, a maintainer for the DataStream project, receives this Slack message from a potential contributor, Emily: 'I've built a new CLI tool that automatically parses our raw log files and generates JSON reports! It's significantly faster than our current manual process. I think it would be a fantastic addition to the DataStream ecosystem!' Bob responds with: 'Thanks for sharing this, Emily! We're really focused on improving the core data ingestion pipeline right now – specifically optimizing query performance. While your tool has potential, it doesn't directly address those immediate needs.' What is Bob's primary intention in his response?The correct answer is B.
Bob isn't rejecting Emily outright; he's explaining the project's current priorities – query performance optimization – and clearly stating that Emily's tool doesn't contribute to those goals. Options A and D misrepresent his tone by suggesting immediate acceptance or implying a better fit elsewhere, while option C introduces an unnecessary element of requiring a cost-benefit analysis.12 / 25
Alice submitted a pull request to the AwesomeLib project. The PR includes a new function to calculate prime numbers, but the maintainer, Bob, comments: 'This is a great idea! However, it doesn't directly address our current API design goals for number processing. Could you explore refactoring existing functions to handle prime calculations more efficiently instead?' What is Bob's primary intention in this comment?
A: To reject
Alice's PR entirely and ask her to start a completely new project.
B: To politely suggest an alternative approach that aligns with the project's existing architecture and priorities, focusing on optimization rather than introducing a new function.
C: To request Alice provide a detailed technical specification of how her prime number calculation would integrate into the current system.
D: To express frustration that Alice hasn't already implemented the solution themselves and needs guidance.Bob isn't dismissing Alice's contribution outright. Instead, he's offering constructive feedback by suggesting a more aligned approach – improving existing code for efficiency – which is typical of open-source maintainers who want to ensure new contributions fit within the project's overall strategy and technical debt. Option A is too extreme; option C asks for unnecessary detail at this stage. Option D reflects frustration, not helpful guidance.13 / 25
Sarah is new to the OpenSourceWidget project and wants to contribute. She sends a Slack message saying, 'Hey team, I've written a script that automatically generates documentation for our API! It's really cool and will save us tons of time!' The project maintainer, David, responds with: 'Thanks for the suggestion, Sarah! We appreciate you thinking about improving our documentation. However, we're currently focused on stabilizing the core API and addressing critical bugs. Generating automated documentation is a nice-to-have feature, but it's not a priority right now.' What is David's primary concern in his response?David is prioritizing the project's immediate needs – bug fixes and API stability. He's not rejecting Sarah's idea outright but gently explaining that it doesn't fit within the current roadmap. Option A is too dismissive; option C accurately reflects his concern about priorities. Option D is a reasonable request, but not David's primary intention in this concise Slack exchange – he wants to steer Sarah towards a more appropriate contribution path.14 / 25
Bob, a maintainer for the DataStream project, receives this Slack message from a potential contributor, Emily: 'I've built a new CLI tool that automatically parses our raw log files and generates JSON reports! It's significantly faster than our current manual process. I think it would be a fantastic addition to the DataStream ecosystem!' Bob responds with: 'Thanks for sharing this, Emily! We're really focused on improving the core data ingestion pipeline right now – specifically optimizing query performance. While your tool has potential, it doesn't directly address those immediate needs.' What is Bob's primary intention in his response?The correct answer is B.
Bob isn't rejecting Emily outright; he's explaining the project's current priorities – query performance optimization – and clearly stating that Emily's tool doesn't contribute to those goals. Options A and D misrepresent his tone by suggesting immediate acceptance or implying a better fit elsewhere, while option C introduces an unnecessary element of requiring a cost-benefit analysis.15 / 25
Alice submitted a pull request to the AwesomeLib project. The PR includes a new function to calculate prime numbers, but the maintainer, Bob, comments: 'This is a great idea! However, it doesn't directly address our current API design goals for number processing. Could you explore refactoring existing functions to handle prime calculations more efficiently instead?' What is Bob's primary intention in this comment?
A: To reject
Alice's PR entirely and ask her to start a completely new project.
B: To politely suggest an alternative approach that aligns with the project's existing architecture and priorities, focusing on optimization rather than introducing a new function.
C: To request Alice provide a detailed technical specification of how her prime number calculation would integrate into the current system.
D: To express frustration that Alice hasn't already implemented the solution themselves and needs guidance.Bob isn't dismissing Alice's contribution outright. Instead, he's offering constructive feedback by suggesting a more aligned approach – improving existing code for efficiency – which is typical of open-source maintainers who want to ensure new contributions fit within the project's overall strategy and technical debt. Option A is too extreme; option C asks for unnecessary detail at this stage. Option D reflects frustration, not helpful guidance.16 / 25
Sarah is new to the OpenSourceWidget project and wants to contribute. She sends a Slack message saying, 'Hey team, I've written a script that automatically generates documentation for our API! It's really cool and will save us tons of time!' The project maintainer, David, responds with: 'Thanks for the suggestion, Sarah! We appreciate you thinking about improving our documentation. However, we're currently focused on stabilizing the core API and addressing critical bugs. Generating automated documentation is a nice-to-have feature, but it's not a priority right now.' What is David's primary concern in his response?David is prioritizing the project's immediate needs – bug fixes and API stability. He's not rejecting Sarah's idea outright but gently explaining that it doesn't fit within the current roadmap. Option A is too dismissive; option C accurately reflects his concern about priorities. Option D is a reasonable request, but not David's primary intention in this concise Slack exchange – he wants to steer Sarah towards a more appropriate contribution path.17 / 25
Bob, a maintainer for the DataStream project, receives this Slack message from a potential contributor, Emily: 'I've built a new CLI tool that automatically parses our raw log files and generates JSON reports! It's significantly faster than our current manual process. I think it would be a fantastic addition to the DataStream ecosystem!' Bob responds with: 'Thanks for sharing this, Emily! We're really focused on improving the core data ingestion pipeline right now – specifically optimizing query performance. While your tool has potential, it doesn't directly address those immediate needs.' What is Bob's primary intention in his response?The correct answer is B.
Bob isn't rejecting Emily outright; he's explaining the project's current priorities – query performance optimization – and clearly stating that Emily's tool doesn't contribute to those goals. Options A and D misrepresent his tone by suggesting immediate acceptance or implying a better fit elsewhere, while option C introduces an unnecessary element of requiring a cost-benefit analysis.18 / 25
Alice submitted a pull request to the AwesomeLib project. The PR includes a new function to calculate prime numbers, but the maintainer, Bob, comments: 'This is a great idea! However, it doesn't directly address our current API design goals for number processing. Could you explore refactoring existing functions to handle prime calculations more efficiently instead?' What is Bob's primary intention in this comment?
A: To reject
Alice's PR entirely and ask her to start a completely new project.
B: To politely suggest an alternative approach that aligns with the project's existing architecture and priorities, focusing on optimization rather than introducing a new function.
C: To request Alice provide a detailed technical specification of how her prime number calculation would integrate into the current system.
D: To express frustration that Alice hasn't already implemented the solution themselves and needs guidance.Bob isn't dismissing Alice's contribution outright. Instead, he's offering constructive feedback by suggesting a more aligned approach – improving existing code for efficiency – which is typical of open-source maintainers who want to ensure new contributions fit within the project's overall strategy and technical debt. Option A is too extreme; option C asks for unnecessary detail at this stage. Option D reflects frustration, not helpful guidance.19 / 25
Sarah is new to the OpenSourceWidget project and wants to contribute. She sends a Slack message saying, 'Hey team, I've written a script that automatically generates documentation for our API! It's really cool and will save us tons of time!' The project maintainer, David, responds with: 'Thanks for the suggestion, Sarah! We appreciate you thinking about improving our documentation. However, we're currently focused on stabilizing the core API and addressing critical bugs. Generating automated documentation is a nice-to-have feature, but it's not a priority right now.' What is David's primary concern in his response?David is prioritizing the project's immediate needs – bug fixes and API stability. He's not rejecting Sarah's idea outright but gently explaining that it doesn't fit within the current roadmap. Option A is too dismissive; option C accurately reflects his concern about priorities. Option D is a reasonable request, but not David's primary intention in this concise Slack exchange – he wants to steer Sarah towards a more appropriate contribution path.20 / 25
Bob, a maintainer for the DataStream project, receives this Slack message from a potential contributor, Emily: 'I've built a new CLI tool that automatically parses our raw log files and generates JSON reports! It's significantly faster than our current manual process. I think it would be a fantastic addition to the DataStream ecosystem!' Bob responds with: 'Thanks for sharing this, Emily! We're really focused on improving the core data ingestion pipeline right now – specifically optimizing query performance. While your tool has potential, it doesn't directly address those immediate needs.' What is Bob's primary intention in his response?The correct answer is B.
Bob isn't rejecting Emily outright; he's explaining the project's current priorities – query performance optimization – and clearly stating that Emily's tool doesn't contribute to those goals. Options A and D misrepresent his tone by suggesting immediate acceptance or implying a better fit elsewhere, while option C introduces an unnecessary element of requiring a cost-benefit analysis.21 / 25
During a code review of a pull request for the `StreamProcessor` library, David comments: 'This implementation uses synchronous I/O which could block the main thread and negatively impact performance. Consider using asynchronous operations.'
Which of the following best describes David's feedback regarding the PR?
David's comment highlights a critical performance consideration – blocking the main thread. Asynchronous I/O avoids this issue, preventing slowdowns. The core of his feedback centers on improving efficiency and responsiveness. The other options misinterpret David's concern – it's not about stylistic preference or a fundamental error.
22 / 25
Liam, a new contributor to the `QuantumCalc` project, sends this Slack message: 'I've created a script that automatically generates documentation for our API endpoints using Swagger. It's going to be incredibly helpful!'
What is Liam *most* likely trying to achieve with this message?
Liam's message clearly states that he's created a tool (Swagger documentation) and is seeking feedback. This aligns with typical open-source contribution behavior – sharing helpful tools and getting input on their usage. The other options represent different, less likely scenarios.
23 / 25
In a pull request for the `LogAnalyzer` project, Maria writes the following description: 'This PR adds a new feature to automatically identify and flag suspicious log entries based on predefined patterns. It uses regular expressions.'
Which of the following phrases would be MOST helpful to add to this description to improve its clarity and usefulness for reviewers?
Maria's description focuses on the technical aspects (regex) but lacks guidance for reviewers. Specifically, asking them to check the regex against security policies is critical – this highlights a potential risk and guides their review process effectively. The other options are irrelevant or over-emphasize features without crucial context.
24 / 25
During the daily standup for the `PixelForge` project, John says: 'I've been working on optimizing the image processing pipeline to reduce memory usage.'
Which of the following is the BEST way for John to elaborate on this statement during the standup?
John needs to provide *concrete* details about his progress. Quantifying the improvement (20% reduction) demonstrates the impact of his work clearly. This provides a specific metric for discussion and shows he's delivering tangible value. The other options are vague or irrelevant.
25 / 25
The `AuthService` API returns the following JSON response after a user attempts to log in with invalid credentials:
{ "status": 'error', "message": 'Invalid username or password.' }What does this response *primarily* indicate?
This response clearly communicates that the provided credentials (username or password) are incorrect. It's a standard error message indicating the fundamental issue preventing successful authentication. The other options represent different potential problems with the authentication process.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the "CONTRIBUTING.md and Open Source Documentation (English)" exercise cover?
Practice the vocabulary and structure of CONTRIBUTING.md files, code of conduct, and open-source community documentation.
Is this exercise free to use?
Yes. Every exercise on CoderSlingo, including this one, is free to use with no account, sign-up, or paywall.
How many questions are in "CONTRIBUTING.md and Open Source Documentation (English)"?
This exercise has 25 questions. Each one gives instant feedback with an explanation, so you can see exactly why an answer is right or wrong.
Do I need to create an account to save my progress?
No account is required. The progress bar and score are tracked in your browser for the current session -- the exercise is designed to be a quick, repeatable drill rather than something you resume later.
What happens if I get an answer wrong?
You'll see the correct answer highlighted immediately, along with a short explanation of why it's correct. Wrong answers aren't penalized beyond your score, and you can keep going through every question.
How is this exercise different from reading an article?
Articles explain vocabulary and concepts through prose, while exercises like this one are interactive drills -- multiple-choice questions -- that test and reinforce your recall of specific terms and phrasing.
Can I retry this exercise?
Yes -- use the "Try again" button on the results screen to reset your score and go through all the questions again from the start.
Where can I find more Documentation Types exercises?
Browse the full Documentation Types hub for related drills, or check the site-wide exercises index for other IT English topics.
Is this exercise suitable for beginners?
This exercise assumes basic familiarity with IT terminology. If a term feels unfamiliar, check the site Glossary for a plain-English definition before attempting the questions.
How often is new content like this published?
New exercises are added regularly across all categories, alongside new vocabulary sets and articles. Check back on the exercises hub to see what's new.