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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Add PR review checklist #1192

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Add PR review checklist #1192

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1155249
Add template PR review comment
arjunsavel Jun 18, 2020
ca0c338
Update with correct checklist
arjunsavel Jun 29, 2020
72fafbe
Indent correctly
arjunsavel Jul 8, 2020
f51b8a9
Use hyperlink in PR comment
arjunsavel Jul 8, 2020
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
25 changes: 20 additions & 5 deletions .github/workflows/PR_reviews.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -10,8 +10,23 @@ jobs:
env:
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
with:
msg: "Reviewers, please ensure that you check the below items. \n
[ ] Condition 1 \n
[ ] Condition 2 \n
[ ] Condition 3 \n"
check_for_duplicate_msg: true # this is only commented once
msg: "Before a PR is accepted, it must meet the following criteria: \n
[ ] Is the necessary information provided? \n
[ ] Does the PR have a complete description? Does it explain what the PR is attempting to do/fix, does it explain how it does this? \n
[ ] Is there an explanation of why this PR is needed? \n
[ ] Please use the following PR template: https://github.com/tardis-sn/tardis/blob/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md \n
[ ] Is this a duplicate PR? \n
[ ] If a new PR is clearly a duplicate, ask how this PR is different from the original PR? \n
[ ] If this PR is about to be merged, close the original PR with a link to this new PR that solved the issue. \n
[ ] Does it pass existing tests and are new tests provided if required? \n
[ ] The test coverage should not decrease, and for new features should be at or very close to 100%. \n
[ ] Is the code properly documented? \n
[ ] If this modifies existing code, then the docs should be updated. If this adds a new feature, additional documentation should be created. \n
[ ] Sphinx and docstrings in the code (in numpydoc format) \n
[ ] Does this conform to PEP 8 and the TARDIS style guidelines? \n
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Where does "TARDIS style guidelines" live - can we add a link to them here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think that we have these yet — currently an issue (#1170 ) and a PR (#1183 ). Would you recommend removing this line for now, waiting until we have a style guide to push this, or something else?

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 think we can remove TARDIS style guidelines and perhaps put black code style (with black hyperlinked).

[ ] Does the PR fix the problem it describes? \n
[ ] Make sure it doesn’t e.g. just fix the problem for a specific case \n
[ ] Is this the best way of fixing the problem? \n
[ ] Is the code tidy? \n
[ ] No unnecessary print lines or code comments \n"
check_for_duplicate_msg: true # this is only commented once