Thank you for considering it. The most valuable contribution this project can receive is a substantive review of a single pattern — a comment that says "this failed for us because…" is worth more than praise for the whole framework.
- Review a pattern. Open an issue or comment on the pattern's file. Disagreement with a pattern's Position section is especially welcome; that section exists to be argued with.
- Propose a pattern. Use the pattern-proposal issue template. Proposals need the problem, the position ("do X, not Y"), and honest prior art — a pointer to the closest existing writing, even if it partly covers your idea.
- Contribute a case study. Open an issue. Anonymized is fine; fabricated is not.
- Fix errors. PRs for factual errors, dead links, or broken citations are always welcome.
- Provenance is load-bearing. Every pattern lists its sources in a Sources & Stories section, every citation key resolves in REFERENCES.md, and a claim that is the framework's own says so in the text. CI checks the section and the keys. The landscape each pattern came from is recorded in docs/prior-art.md.
- Vendor neutral. Patterns describe categories of tool and classes of failure, never named products.
- No confidential material. Do not contribute your employer's internal metrics, system names, or numbers. Abstract to how the class of problem behaves.
- Template discipline. Pattern content follows the eight-section template exactly.
Documentation contributions are accepted under CC BY 4.0; code and template contributions under MIT (see LICENSE). By submitting, you agree your contribution is licensed accordingly.