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

doc: improve github templates by using comments #5710

Merged

Conversation

jbergstroem
Copy link
Member

Pull Request check-list

  • Does make -j8 test (UNIX) or vcbuild test nosign (Windows) pass with
    this change (including linting)?
  • Is the commit message formatted according to [CONTRIBUTING.md][0]?
  • If this change fixes a bug (or a performance problem), is a regression
    test (or a benchmark) included?
  • Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies
    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:

  • tests and linting pass

..than:

  • Is the commit message formatted according to CONTRIBUTING.md?

so, I moved some of the instructions to the top instead.

Guessing this is bikeshedding but at least I get to paint it first!

@jbergstroem jbergstroem added the doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. label Mar 15, 2016
@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Mar 15, 2016

It seems like a good change, however I think keeping the link to the contributing document is helpful.

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

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?

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Mar 15, 2016

I just thought having it clickable was a nice convenience.

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

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
Copy link
Contributor

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

Copy link
Member Author

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.

Copy link
Member

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

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Mar 15, 2016

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. -->
Copy link
Contributor

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

Copy link
Member Author

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.

Copy link
Member

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.

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Mar 15, 2016

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

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Mar 16, 2016

+1 @mscdex

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

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 n/4 as part of the pr would at least imply that someone has chosen to engage with the questions we're asking.

Just to move this forward: should we remove the checkboxes? I'm +0.

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Mar 16, 2016

I'm OK with changing the checkboxes to bullet points. We can always change them back.

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

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
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Member Author

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.

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

I'll do another round of updates to reflect all feedback shortly.

@mikeal
Copy link
Contributor

mikeal commented Apr 2, 2016

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.

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

We could even auto-assign people (and possibly teams, I requested that to github the other week) to issues/pr's with that bot.

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

for bot-talk, see nodejs/TSC#51

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

@jbergstroem can we get this merged? If you don't have time, mind if I pick it up?

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

@Fishrock123 been busy; can find some time today.

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

Just updated based on feedback so far. Available for a few quick rounds of fixes if necessary.

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Apr 5, 2016

LGTM

@jbergstroem
Copy link
Member Author

@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
Copy link
Contributor

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>

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was under the impression that we wanted to remove the checklists while reviewing comments (ref @mscdex's comment and feedback from @jasnell, @Trott, you and I).

Copy link
Contributor

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).

Copy link
Member Author

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.

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

@jbergstroem 3 nits, LGTM otherwise!

@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

@jbergstroem LGTM!

@silverwind
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@jbergstroem jbergstroem force-pushed the feature/improve-pr-commit-template branch from 32c6181 to 05362db Compare April 5, 2016 23:18
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>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants