Cosmos-sdk: Add descriptions for GoDoc reference

[fedekunze]

Our Godoc is currently missing a lot of descriptions of functions, structs and so on within packages. This is a very important issue because it's crucial for our developer adoption to have a well done reference documentation.

I would also suggest that every in every future PR, we check that all the code is properly commented with their corresponding descriptions.

[cwgoes]

If you like, you can add a checkbox to .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md. Not sure if I'm in favor of enforcing on every merge, but we could also add a checkbox to CI which checks for the existence of Godoc comments using some linter rules.

[rigelrozanski]

OH yeah there is a lot missing from go-doc - unfortunately, I'm not sure it's best tool for us to use based on how it can take away from having a concise codebase by requiring verbose comments in a lot of places - still open of course, i DO like go-doc

[ebuchman]

unfortunately, I'm not sure it's best tool for us to use based on how it can take away from having a concise codebase by requiring verbose comments in a lot of places

Don't really understand this. Seems we should take as much advantage of the go toolchain as possible, including GoDocs. It will reduce pressure on maintaining independent documentation with duplicated data structures and comments

[rigelrozanski]

I was concerned with what go docs looks like using our own linter - maybe it's not a big issue

In agreement now, think we should do whatever it takes to make our go-docs a viable resource, it's the standard place for devs to looks, so yeah, let's support that obviously.

[zramsay]

2154