* Before the PR is applied, the new tests should fail.
* After applying the PR, the new tests should pass.
* Coverage should stay at 100%.
* If you see the PR makes sense, or we discussed it and considered it should be accepted, you can add commits on top of the PR to tweak it, to add docs, tests, format, refactor, remove extra files, etc.
* Feel free to comment in the PR to ask for more information, to suggest changes, etc.

### Typical Pull Request Workflow -

**1. New PR**

- As a contributor, you submit a New PR on GitHub.
- We inspect every incoming PR and add certain labels to the PR such as `size:`,
  `comp:` etc.  At this stage we check if the PR is valid and meets certain
  quality requirements. For example, we check if the CLA is signed, PR has
  sufficient description, if applicable unit tests are added, if it is a

    translation_reviewers = Counter()
    authors: Dict[str, Author] = {}

    for pr in pr_nodes:
        author_name = None
        if pr.author:
            authors[pr.author.login] = pr.author
            author_name = pr.author.login
        pr_commentors: Set[str] = set()
        pr_reviewers: Set[str] = set()
        for comment in pr.comments.nodes:
            if comment.author:

    # Messages to create or check
    new_translation_message = f"Good news everyone! 😉 There's a new translation PR to be reviewed: #{pr.number} by @{pr.user.login}. 🎉 This requires 2 approvals from native speakers to be merged. 🤓"
    done_translation_message = f"~There's a new translation PR to be reviewed: #{pr.number} by @{pr.user.login}~ Good job! This is done. 🍰☕"

    # Normally only one language, but still
    for lang in langs:

/// info

Niestety, nie mogę ślepo ufać PR-om, nawet jeśli mają kilka zatwierdzeń.

Kilka razy zdarzyło się, że PR-y miały 3, 5 lub więcej zatwierdzeń (prawdopodobnie dlatego, że opis obiecuje rozwiązanie ważnego problemu), ale gdy sam sprawdziłem danego PR-a, okazał się być zbugowany lub nie rozwiązywał problemu, który rzekomo miał rozwiązywać. 😅

		return nil, err
	}
	if !ok {
		return nil, os.ErrNotExist
	}

	pr, pw := io.Pipe()

	wa := &writerAt{
		buffer: make(map[int64][]byte),
		w:      pw,
		r:      pr,
		wg:     &sync.WaitGroup{},
	}
	wa.wg.Add(1)
	go func() {
		oi, err := clnt.PutObject(r.Context(), bucket, object, pr, -1, minio.PutObjectOptions{
			ContentType:          mimedb.TypeByExtension(path.Ext(object)),

///

* If the PR can be simplified in a way, you can ask for that, but there's no need to be too picky, there might be a lot of subjective points of view (and I will have my own as well 🙈), so it's better if you can focus on the fundamental things.

### Tests

* Help me check that the PR has **tests**.

* Check that the tests **fail** before the PR. 🚨

	if err != nil {
		return err
	}
	defer xhttp.DrainBody(respBody)

	pr, pw := io.Pipe()
	go func() {
		pw.CloseWithError(waitForHTTPStream(respBody, ioutil.NewDeadlineWriter(pw, globalDriveConfig.GetMaxTimeout())))
	}()
	mr := msgp.NewReader(pr)
	defer readMsgpReaderPoolPut(mr)
	for {
		var file ReadMultipleResp
		if err := file.DecodeMsg(mr); err != nil {

    }


    @Override
    public String getUserDomain () {
        if ( this.realm == null && this.getSubject() != null ) {
            Set<Principal> pr = this.getSubject().getPrincipals();
            for ( Iterator<Principal> ite = pr.iterator(); ite.hasNext(); ) {
                try {
                    KerberosPrincipal entry = (KerberosPrincipal) ite.next();
                    return entry.getRealm();

`git push --force origin test-branch`

### Fixing sanity check failures after public API changes

If your PR includes any changes to the Gradle Public API, it will cause the binary compatibility check to fail.
The binary compatibility check runs as a part of the broader sanity check.
The latter runs on every PR and is a prerequisite for merging.