Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings
/jujuPublic

Add comprehensive documentation analysis for doc.go files#21122

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Draft
Copilot wants to merge2 commits intomain
base:main
Choose a base branch
Loading
fromcopilot/review-documentation-quality

Conversation

Copy link

CopilotAI commentedNov 5, 2025
edited
Loading

Analyzed documentation quality, consistency, and completeness ofdoc.go files across the repository per issue requirements.

Analysis Deliverable

CreatedDOCUMENTATION_ANALYSIS.md - a comprehensive 646-line assessment covering:

Quality (§1): Documentation ranges from exemplary (e.g.,domain/doc.go at 117 lines with architecture, conventions, testing guidelines) to minimal (5-line generic descriptions). 50-55% of files are minimally informative with no architectural context or API details.

Consistency (§2):

  • Style: 97.8% use line comments (good); opening patterns reasonably consistent but "provides" overused
  • Terminology: Inconsistent use of "API facade" vs "API client" vs "domain service"
  • Category consistency: HIGH within package types (all API clients similar), LOW across types

Missing Documentation (§3):

  • Coverage: 21% (232/1,101 packages with Go code)
  • Critical gaps: 7 major packages lack doc.go (agent/,api/,apiserver/,environs/,controller/,internal/,juju/)
  • 50+ important subdirectories missing, including entireapi/ andapiserver/ hierarchies

Recommendations

Four-phase implementation strategy prioritized by impact:

  1. P1: Document major architectural boundaries (agent, api, apiserver, environs)
  2. P2: Expand 120+ minimal (<10 line) files with API surface and usage examples
  3. P3: Create style guide and standardize terminology
  4. P4: Add architectural overview documents and design pattern documentation

Target metrics: 60%+ coverage, 25+ line average (from 14.2), consistent terminology across 95%+ of files.

Examples Referenced

Best practices to emulate:

  • domain/doc.go: Package layout with directory structure, naming conventions, implementation rules
  • rpc/doc.go: Sequence flows, key components, client-server interaction details
  • core/securitylog/doc.go: Supported operations list, code examples with output

Improvement needed:

  • core/secrets/doc.go: "Package secrets is used for the core secrets data model" - lacks data model details
  • api/client/charms/doc.go: "Package charms provides a client" - no API methods or usage shown
Original prompt

Quality
Is documentation clear, concise, and informative for the package?
Does it describe the package’s purpose, usage, and API?

Consistency
Is documentation style and structure consistent with Go standards and other doc.go files?
Are conventions reliably followed?
Are doc.go consistently distributed over subpackage ?

Missing Documentation
Is any important domain-level documentation missing?
Are there sections not explained, or packages that should have a doc.go but do not?

Don't modify any code, just provide your detailed analysis and suggestion as a comment.


💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our2 minute survey.

Co-authored-by: gfouillet <172264669+gfouillet@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI changed the title[WIP] Review documentation clarity and consistency for packageAdd comprehensive documentation analysis for doc.go filesNov 5, 2025
CopilotAI requested a review fromgfouilletNovember 5, 2025 11:32
Copilot finished work on behalf ofgfouilletNovember 5, 2025 11:32
@gfouillet
Copy link
Contributor

@copilot Which package would you recommend as good example for completing documentation of same-level missing package documentation ?

As an answer to this comment, give a list of those package with link to the example and reference to their possible application.

Copy link
Author

CopilotAI commentedNov 5, 2025

@copilot Which package would you recommend as good example for completing documentation of same-level missing package documentation ?

As an answer to this comment, give a list of those package with l...

Here's a categorized list of well-documented packages that can serve as templates for completing missing documentation at the same level:

Top-Level Package Examples (for agent/, api/, apiserver/, environs/, controller/, internal/, juju/)

Best comprehensive example:

  • domain/doc.go (117 lines) - Exemplary architectural documentation with package layout, conventions, testing guidelines, and implementation notes. Perfect template for documenting major packages.

Good architectural examples:

  • core/doc.go (65 lines) - Clear scope boundaries, import restrictions, migration paths
  • rpc/doc.go (72 lines) - Protocol documentation with sequence flows, key components, client-server interaction
  • cmd/doc.go (36 lines) - Explains key structs, usage patterns, design decisions

Application: Usedomain/doc.go as template for documentingagent/,api/,apiserver/,environs/ with architecture overview, package organization, conventions, and relationships.

Subdirectory/Utility Package Examples (for api/client/, api/common/, apiserver/facade/, etc.)

Domain service packages:

Application: Use for documentingapi/client/,api/agent/,api/controller/ subdirectories - explain organization and purpose.

Worker Package Examples (for internal/worker/* subdirectories)

Excellent worker documentation:

Application: Template for documenting worker packages - explain purpose, behavior, services/dependencies, relationships.

Utility/Helper Package Examples (for internal/*, apiserver/common/, etc.)

Authentication/Authorization:

Infrastructure/Tools:

Application: Template for utility packages ininternal/,apiserver/common/,api/base/ - clear purpose, usage patterns, examples where helpful.

Facade/API Package Examples (for apiserver/facades/, api/client/)

API facade with context:

Application: Use for documenting API facades - explain what APIs are exposed, typical scenarios, relationships.

Core Type Packages (for core/* subdirectories)

Type definition packages:

Application: Template for core type packages - explain types, relationships, usage examples.

Command/CLI Package Examples (for cmd/* subdirectories)

Application: Template for command packages - explain command purpose, groupings, usage scenarios.

Special Purpose Examples

Tools/Agent binaries:

Testing packages:

Application: Reference for packages with special context needs.

Key Patterns to Follow

  1. Start with clear purpose - "Package X provides/implements/defines..."
  2. Add context - Why does this package exist? What problem does it solve?
  3. Explain key concepts - List main types, operations, or behaviors
  4. Show relationships - Reference related packages, dependencies
  5. Include examples when helpful - Code snippets, command lists, ASCII diagrams
  6. Document constraints - What should/shouldn't be in the package

Usedomain/doc.go (117 lines) as the gold standard for major architectural packages, and scale down appropriately for smaller utility packages (15-25 lines sufficient).

Copilot finished work on behalf ofgfouilletNovember 5, 2025 12:50
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@gfouilletgfouilletAwaiting requested review from gfouillet

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Labels

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@gfouillet@jujubot

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp