A specific issue, but a general question

I want to talk about networkx, but I really want to learn how to have productive conversations about complex technical topics.

The basics

• typeshed has "broad" stubs for networkx: stubs/networkx/networkx,
• I have "deep" stubs for three networkx files (stubFileNotFound).
  1. stubs/networkx/classes/graph.pyi
  2. stubs/networkx/classes/digraph.pyi
  3. stubs/networkx/algorithms/lowest_common_ancestors.pyi
• I want to
  1. Reconcile the differences between our files and
  2. Contribute to the typeshed versions.

My noob ignorance is a barrier

To achieve the above goals, I need to correctly navigate git, GitHub, typeshed pull request processes (OR to know that I should not use a pull request and to know what other tool I should use), diagnostic errors from umpteen apps, and, you know, to accurately annotate a sophisticated package. Furthermore, I have only contributed to stdlib, and it feels strange to me to discuss an actively maintained third-party package. I feel like there must be etiquette for this, but I don't know what that might be.

Plus, I have no self-confidence about most topics, and I hate that I keep pissing people off.

Another (self-inflicted) complication

The typeshed stubs do not have docstrings. My stubs have edited docstrings based on the original docstrings. This is probably a trivial issue, but it is another issue.

Guidance?

The diff tool in a pull request seems useful, but I am not ready to claim that my versions of the three files should be part of typeshed, so a pull request seems like the wrong tool.

The amount of information seems excessive for Python Type School!.

An important feature of a good process is the ability to accurately and quickly identify "misfits." If my suggested annotations are patently wrong, for example, a good process allows y'all to avoid wasting your time.

There is probably a smart way, or at least a smarter way, for me to start a conversation about this, but I don't know what it is.