Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify PR template #74

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 10, 2024
Merged

Clarify PR template #74

merged 3 commits into from
Sep 10, 2024

Conversation

joeloskarsson
Copy link
Collaborator

@joeloskarsson joeloskarsson commented Sep 5, 2024

Describe your changes

As a new contributor you can not actually assign reviewers and asignees to PRs. But we request this in the PR template:

- [ ] I have requested a reviewer and an assignee (assignee is responsible for merging)

This change clarifies the PR template to state that you only have to do this if you are able to. Otherwise we instruct contributors to tag a maintainer to add reviewer and asignee.

Issue Link

Solves #73

Type of change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • 📖 Documentation (Addition or improvements to documentation)

Checklist before requesting a review

  • My branch is up-to-date with the target branch - if not update your fork with the changes from the target branch (use pull with --rebase option if possible).
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • For any new/modified functions/classes I have added docstrings that clearly describe its purpose, expected inputs and returned values
  • I have placed in-line comments to clarify the intent of any hard-to-understand passages of my code
  • I have updated the README to cover introduced code changes
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have given the PR a name that clearly describes the change, written in imperative form (context).
  • I have requested a reviewer and an assignee (assignee is responsible for merging)

Checklist for reviewers

Each PR comes with its own improvements and flaws. The reviewer should check the following:

  • the code is readable
  • the code is well tested
  • the code is documented (including return types and parameters)
  • the code is easy to maintain

Author checklist after completed review

  • I have added a line to the CHANGELOG describing this change, in a section
    reflecting type of change (add section where missing):
    • added: when you have added new functionality
    • changed: when default behaviour of the code has been changed
    • fixes: when your contribution fixes a bug

Checklist for assignee

  • PR is up to date with the base branch
  • the tests pass
  • author has added an entry to the changelog (and designated the change as added, changed or fixed)
  • Once the PR is ready to be merged, squash commits and merge the PR.

@sadamov sadamov linked an issue Sep 5, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@sadamov sadamov added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Sep 5, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@sadamov sadamov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks, this should clarify the required roles.

Copy link
Member

@leifdenby leifdenby left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great, thanks!

@joeloskarsson joeloskarsson merged commit a2ddcd4 into main Sep 10, 2024
17 checks passed
@joeloskarsson joeloskarsson deleted the pr_template_clarification branch October 17, 2024 14:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Asking new contributors to assign reviewers, which is not possible
3 participants