- Adheres to MinIO’s coding standards (e.g., Go style, error handling, testing).

PRs must flow smoothly through review to reach production. Large PRs should be split into smaller, manageable ones.

## Submitting PRs

1. **Title and Summary**:
   - Use a scannable title: `[Subsystem] Action Description #Issue` (e.g., `[IAM] Add role-based access control #567`).

						}
					}
				}
			}
		}
		prs := peerResults[local]
		if prs.Err == "" {
			if err = commitBinary(); err != nil {
				prs.Err = err.Error()
			}
			peerResults[local] = prs
		}
	}

	prs, ok := peerResults[local]
	if ok {
		prs.WaitingDrives = waitingDrivesNode()
		peerResults[local] = prs
	}

	if globalIsDistErasure {

version: 2
updates:
# TODO(b/170636568): Enable Maven updates? Perhaps wait until we can more
# easily import the generated PRs into our internal repo.
#  - package-ecosystem: "maven"
#    directory: "/"
#    schedule:
#      interval: "weekly"
#    groups:
#      dependencies:
#        applies-to: version-updates
#        patterns:
#          - "*"
#  - package-ecosystem: "maven"
#    directory: "/android"
#    schedule:

/// info | Información

Desafortunadamente, no puedo simplemente confiar en PRs que solo tienen varias aprobaciones.

Varias veces ha sucedido que hay PRs con 3, 5 o más aprobaciones, probablemente porque la descripción es atractiva, pero cuando reviso los PRs, en realidad están rotos, tienen un bug, o no resuelven el problema que dicen resolver. 😅

on:
  push:
  pull_request_target:
    types: [synchronize]

jobs:
  main:
    permissions:
      contents: read
      pull-requests: write
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Check if PRs have merge conflicts
        uses: eps1lon/actions-label-merge-conflict@v3
        with:
          dirtyLabel: "conflicts"
          repoToken: "${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}"

/// info

Leider kann ich PRs, nur weil sie von Mehreren gutgeheißen wurden, nicht einfach vertrauen.

Es ist mehrmals passiert, dass es PRs mit drei, fünf oder mehr Zustimmungen gibt, wahrscheinlich weil die Beschreibung ansprechend ist, aber wenn ich die PRs überprüfe, sind sie tatsächlich fehlerhaft, haben einen Bug, oder lösen das Problem nicht, welches sie behaupten, zu lösen. 😅

/// info

Unfortunately, I can't simply trust PRs that just have several approvals.

Several times it has happened that there are PRs with 3, 5 or more approvals, probably because the description is appealing, but when I check the PRs, they are actually broken, have a bug, or don't solve the problem they claim to solve. 😅

description: File a bug report
labels: ["bug"]

body:
  - type: markdown
    attributes:
      value: |
        Thanks for taking the time to fill out this bug report.     

        Simple fixes in single PRs do not require issues. 
  
        **Do you use the latest project version?**

  - type: input
    id: version
    attributes:
      label: Affected version
    validations:
      required: true

Making and Submitting Changes
--------------

We accept Pull Requests via GitHub. The [developer mailing list][dev-ml-list] is the
main channel of communication for contributors.  
There are some guidelines which will make applying PRs easier for us:
+ Create a topic branch from where you want to base your work (this is usually the master branch).
  Push your changes to a topic branch in your fork of the repository.
+ Make commits of logical units.

What’s changing now:

* 🚫 We’re no longer accepting new community-submitted translation PRs.

* ⏳ Existing open PRs will be reviewed and can still be merged if completed within the next 3 weeks (since July 11 2025).