-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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
doc: improve github templates by using comments #5710
doc: improve github templates by using comments #5710
Conversation
It seems like a good change, however I think keeping the link to the contributing document is helpful. |
The link is still there, but I moved it to the instructions at the top. You mean you still want it as part of the checkbox? |
I just thought having it clickable was a nice convenience. |
Yeah; and I guess I somewhat omitted the fact that the commit guidelines are in the contributors guide. The tricky part about the click is that its not available until you either hit preview or submit the PR. |
- [ ] tests and code linting passes | ||
- [ ] a test and/or benchmark is included | ||
- [ ] documentation is changed or added | ||
- [ ] the commit message follows commit guidelines |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Too simple; people coming to the project might not even know these.
The contributing link and how to run the tests should be kept imo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's still around but moved to the top part of the readme; but I guess what you and @mscdex are saying is that it should be kept as a literal part of the checkboxes? As an aside I also added lint
in there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I would make commit guidelines
into a link to the actual commit guidelines.
Also, perhaps add '(make link
and make test
)' at the end of the first bullet point
Generally LGTM with a nit |
* **Platform**: <!-- Either `uname -a` output, or if Windows, version and | ||
32-bit or 64-bit --> | ||
* **Subsystem**: <!-- Optional. If known - please specify | ||
affected core module name. --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
GitHub doesn't appear to parse comments unless they are multiline from the start of the line? See: https://github.com/jbergstroem/node/blob/feature/improve-pr-commit-template/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right. I was rendering in another editor. Will fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM pending this tweak, or even without it, to be honest.
Some of the options have had their meaning changed to no longer be useful imo. We should aim for fully completable checklists on all issues. Having a checklist option that asks "is a change X" is not very useful and make it hard to tell if a PR is complete or not. |
The whole optional checkbox thing is one of the major problems IMHO. If they only check relevant boxes, it looks like the issue/PR is "incomplete", especially because of the way Github shows the progress in the issue/PR list. So I don't know which is better, to rely on users to remove irrelevant checkboxes or to reword the text to basically say check if true OR not relevant. shrug |
+1 @mscdex |
Yeah, I agree that the checkbox thing is tricky. I considered just doing it as a bullet list or similar which people would/could remove, but there's something gratifying about ticking that box.. Also, having a consistent Just to move this forward: should we remove the checkboxes? I'm |
I'm OK with changing the checkboxes to bullet points. We can always change them back. |
Sure. In any case, can we get this merged soon? Even having the existing removable info in html comments would be great. |
below this comment. | ||
--> | ||
|
||
##### Description of change |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe move this on top? It's the most important part of a PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the reason why it is at the bottom is because the commit message (assuming it's one commit) is automatically appended to the end of the PR text when you open a new PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I'd like to have it on top as well but there's no way of affecting output. Ima email github and as if its possible to get a way to control this.
I'll do another round of updates to reflect all feedback shortly. |
It would be a good idea to identify what files are associated with each sub-system and auto-tag those PR's rather than ask users to identify them. |
hmmm, I don't think we've ever thought about using a bot to tag by-file. That's a good idea, I like it. |
We could even auto-assign people (and possibly teams, I requested that to github the other week) to issues/pr's with that bot. |
for bot-talk, see nodejs/TSC#51 |
@jbergstroem can we get this merged? If you don't have time, mind if I pick it up? |
@Fishrock123 been busy; can find some time today. |
Just updated based on feedback so far. Available for a few quick rounds of fixes if necessary. |
LGTM |
@Fishrock123 better? |
- tests and code linting passes | ||
- a test and/or benchmark is included | ||
- documentation is changed or added | ||
- the commit message follows commit guidelines |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should these still be an actual checklist? i.e. - [ ] <etc>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmmm i was not under that impression
My comment was about making sure these things were actually a checklist (i.e. tests pass).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok; lets re-add them in the name of progress and move forward.
@jbergstroem 3 nits, LGTM otherwise! |
@jbergstroem LGTM! |
LGTM |
32c6181
to
05362db
Compare
Use HTML comments to reduce potential noise in github templates. Also, improve flow of the pull request, making it easier to read. PR-URL: nodejs#5710 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Reiss <me@silverwind.io>
05362db
to
b743d82
Compare
Pull Request check-list
make -j8 test
(UNIX) orvcbuild test nosign
(Windows) pass withthis change (including linting)?
test (or a benchmark) included?
existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?
Affected core subsystem(s)
doc
Description of change
Had a look around other open source projects and came to the conclusion that using html commens (
<!-- foo -->
) successfully reduces clutter.While at it, I also came to the conclusion that its easier to read:
..than:
so, I moved some of the instructions to the top instead.
Guessing this is bikeshedding but at least I get to paint it first!