Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
58 lines (39 loc) · 1.72 KB

File metadata and controls

58 lines (39 loc) · 1.72 KB

Contributing

Thank you for improving TurkishEvalKit. The project favors small, reviewable changes with explicit evaluation semantics over rapid feature accumulation.

Development setup

python -m venv .venv
source .venv/bin/activate
python -m pip install -e ".[dev]"

Run the full local quality suite before opening a pull request:

ruff check .
mypy src
pytest --cov=turkishevalkit --cov-report=term-missing

Pull requests

A focused pull request should explain:

  • what evaluator problem it solves;
  • whether it changes persisted data or rubric semantics;
  • how the behavior is tested;
  • any privacy, bias, or compatibility implications.

Avoid mixing large refactors with rubric changes.

Rubric changes

Rubrics are part of the evaluation contract. Do not silently edit a published rubric version in a way that changes its meaning.

For a new criterion or changed interpretation, include:

  1. a precise definition;
  2. 1–5 scoring guidance;
  3. at least one positive and negative example;
  4. rationale for why the dimension is distinct from existing criteria;
  5. tests and a new rubric version when semantics change.

Human-in-the-loop boundary

Features that automatically generate evaluator judgments must be clearly separated from human-authored ratings and must never be presented as if a human made the decision. Any future model-assisted feature must be opt-in, provenance-labeled, and reviewable.

Sensitive data

Do not commit or attach:

  • private voice recordings;
  • customer prompts or responses without permission;
  • API keys or credentials;
  • proprietary evaluation datasets;
  • personally identifying evaluation material.

Use synthetic or explicitly redistributable examples in tests and documentation.