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

PR / Issue Review process update #2093

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 6, 2018
Merged

PR / Issue Review process update #2093

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 6, 2018

Conversation

bretg
Copy link
Collaborator

@bretg bretg commented Feb 1, 2018

Type of change

  • Other

Description of change

Updated process documentation as discussed in the Prebid Org meeting today.

Copy link
Member

@mkendall07 mkendall07 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great Bret, thank you! Few comments.

pr_review.md Outdated
We take PR review seriously. Please read https://medium.com/@mrjoelkemp/giving-better-code-reviews-16109e0fdd36#.xa8lc4i23 to understand how a PR review should be conducted. Be rational and strict in your review, make sure you understand exactly what the submitter's intent is. Overall 1 person should take ownership of a particular PR. When they are satisfied it's in good condition to merge, they should request 1 additional team member to review as a sanity check. Only when the PR has 2 `LGTM` from the core team should it be merged.
We take PR review seriously. Please read https://medium.com/@mrjoelkemp/giving-better-code-reviews-16109e0fdd36#.xa8lc4i23 to understand how a PR review should be conducted. Be rational and strict in your review, make sure you understand exactly what the submitter's intent is. Anyone in the community can review a PR, but a Prebid Org member is also required. A Prebid Org member should take ownership of a PR and do the initial review.

If the PR is for a standard bid adapter or a standard analytics adapter, just the one review is sufficient. The reviewer will check against [required conventions](http://prebid.org/dev-docs/bidder-adaptor.html#required-adapter-conventions) and may merge the PR after approving and confirming that the documentation PR against prebid.org is open and linked to the issue.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just the one review [from a core team member] is sufficient

pr_review.md Outdated
@@ -23,3 +27,20 @@ We take PR review seriously. Please read https://medium.com/@mrjoelkemp/giving-b
- Verify that code re-use is being done properly and that changes introduced by a bidder don't impact other bidders.
- If the adapter being submitted is an alias type, check with the bidder contact that is being aliased to make sure it's allowed.
- If the adapter is triggering any user syncs make sure they are using the user sync module in the Prebid.js core.
- Requests to the bidder should be in HTTPS
- Responses from the bidder should be compressed
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(such as gzip, compress, deflate)

pr_review.md Outdated
@@ -23,3 +27,20 @@ We take PR review seriously. Please read https://medium.com/@mrjoelkemp/giving-b
- Verify that code re-use is being done properly and that changes introduced by a bidder don't impact other bidders.
- If the adapter being submitted is an alias type, check with the bidder contact that is being aliased to make sure it's allowed.
- If the adapter is triggering any user syncs make sure they are using the user sync module in the Prebid.js core.
- Requests to the bidder should be in HTTPS
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should support HTTPS (doesn't have to be HTTPS 100% of the time)

Copy link
Collaborator

@matthewlane matthewlane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can the file name be capitalized? pr_review.md - > PR_REVIEW.md. GitHub and some editors group caps files together near the top of a directory, small thing but may make it easier to find

@bretg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bretg commented Feb 1, 2018

Not sure the best way to rename a file... copy and delete? @mkendall07 ?

@GLStephen
Copy link
Collaborator

@bretg "git mv pr_review.md PR_REVIEW.md" will track the file change without Git losing its mind.

@mkendall07
Copy link
Member

@bretg
just waiting on the file rename and this can merge.

@matthewlane matthewlane merged commit 68b7d8b into master Feb 6, 2018
@matthewlane matthewlane deleted the review-process-update branch February 6, 2018 18:08
dluxemburg pushed a commit to Genius/Prebid.js that referenced this pull request Jul 17, 2018
* PR / Issue Review process update

* Update pr_review.md

* Capitalize filename
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants