-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30k
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
github: add issue and pull request templates #5291
Conversation
This could be used by bot in future, meanwhile it should be simplify things for people who tag issues manually. cc @mscdex @thealphanerd btw |
(and @nodejs/collaborators ) |
- [ ] solaris | ||
- [ ] other _(please specify which)_ | ||
|
||
### Core part (if known) |
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.
Core subsystem?
It would be nice to include a section about whether or not the PR should be considered for LTS |
@thealphanerd Done. |
I have also re-ordered versions so that most recent ones will appear first. |
### SemVer | ||
|
||
What semver change does this change require? | ||
|
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.
Add (see http://semver.org/)
?
I think this is generally too big and may be even more daunting to newcomers. I'm only in favor of something minimal. |
The more stuff in the template, the larger the barrier for people to submit issues. That may arguably be a good thing, if it prevents people from submitting exceptionally low-quality bug reports. But I would encourage starting with something as minimal as can be tolerated. EDIT: Looks like Jeremiah beat me to it by 30 seconds. |
- [ ] cluster | ||
- [ ] crypto | ||
- [ ] dgram | ||
- [ ] dns |
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.
Add doc
?
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.
Ack.
@Fishrock123 @Trott this mean that someone from the @nodejs/collaborators will have to ask these questions anyway, and it means both time spent on this, and someone's efforts. While templates are looking a bit big indeed, the actual amount of data that I ask is pretty minimal. |
I do agree somewhat with @Fishrock123 and @Trott. Some users may not even know what core part(s) to put a check in (either because it's not obvious initially or the submitter is not familiar enough with node core to be able to comfortably choose). |
@Fishrock123 @Trott being more specific, there are just three questions when opening an issue, and it is asking for details (which are required anyway), and a test case. |
@mscdex that's why it is says (if known)... |
usually we don't have to ask for subsystem, and since we have to tag it anyways, I think that should be let off for if we have caine do it someday. |
@Fishrock123 caine will have to ask for it anyway. The only alternative is a machine learning technique to figure out subsystem automatically. |
|
||
### LTS | ||
|
||
Should this patch be backported to: |
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.
probably unnecessary, if someone doesn't know to specify this they probably won't be tuned into the process enough anyways and we'll probably have to decide, I think?
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.
This sounds reasonable. I will change it once we will decide on general form of these files :)
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.
Ack.
Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore: Maybe we should figure out use cases for issues to make sure the template isn't making too many assumptions. In other words, issues aren't just used to report defects. They are used to submit feature requests. They are used to ask questions, at least some of which are appropriate for this repo. And they are used for process (such as issues for meetings). They are used to notify collaborators of things (such as that the CI is locked down for a period of time). It might be useful to catalog these use cases (and maybe I've done it above), and figure out if the template needs to be generic enough for some of them. (On the one hand, I think someone who is using an issue for a meeting agenda can be expected to delete the template. On the other hand, someone submitting a feature request, maybe not as much?) |
For the record, I am very much in favor of templates. And on balance, I like these templates. I would just be more comfortable starting as small as possible and adding items as we see how it works in the real world. |
|
||
- [ ] 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] |
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.
nit: missing ?
at the end
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.
Ack.
@mscdex all fixed, PTAL |
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 included (or a benchmark)? |
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.
might move (or a benchmark)
before included
.
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.
Ack.
One last nit, but otherwise LGTM |
Afaik @nebrius has been meaning to chime in but was busy, maybe wait another day? |
@Fishrock123 idk, these templates are going to evolve anyway. We may continue discussion on a follow-up fix, I guess? Current version should be good enough for several days of UX testing. |
Alright, going to land it. Thanks everyone! |
Landed in b4c6c5d, thank you everyone! |
Gosh, forgot to include PR-URL. |
Fix: #5246 PR-URL: #5291 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Steven R. Loomis <srloomis@us.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Johan Bergström <bugs@bergstroem.nu> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Reiss <me@silverwind.io> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Brian White <mscdex@mscdex.net>
Sorry, had to force push in 81e35b5 |
Fix: #5246 PR-URL: #5291 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Steven R. Loomis <srloomis@us.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Johan Bergström <bugs@bergstroem.nu> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Reiss <me@silverwind.io> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Brian White <mscdex@mscdex.net>
Refs: nodejs/node#5291 PR-URL: #22 Reviewed-By: Chengqiang Chen <602196490@qq.com> Reviewed-By: Cleverboy32 <wyzhdu@163.com>
Refs: nodejs/node#5291 PR-URL: #22 Reviewed-By: Chengqiang Chen <602196490@qq.com> Reviewed-By: Cleverboy32 <wyzhdu@163.com>
Refs: nodejs/node#5291 PR-URL: #22 Reviewed-By: Chengqiang Chen <602196490@qq.com> Reviewed-By: Cleverboy32 <wyzhdu@163.com>
Fix: #5246
See: https://github.com/blog/2111-issue-and-pull-request-templates
cc @nodejs/ctc