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

chore: Update issue template to a form #7735

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2022

Conversation

mister-ben
Copy link
Contributor

  • Replaces the issues template a form to ensure issues are populated with structured information, and more guidance can be given to help full it out.
  • Disables the ability to create an issue without the template - text in the template direects users to discussions if it's not an bug report.

We might want to consider some other issue types — would separate types for playback issues and general implementation issues be useful? Do we want a "feature request" template? Is no blank issue too strict?

Live example at https://github.com/mister-ben/issues-test-abc/issues/new/choose

@gkatsev
Copy link
Member

gkatsev commented Apr 25, 2022

Should we add fields for expected behavior and actual behavior?

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 25, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #7735 (fe9b160) into main (0543298) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #7735   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   80.90%   80.90%           
=======================================
  Files         116      116           
  Lines        7457     7457           
  Branches     1806     1806           
=======================================
  Hits         6033     6033           
  Misses       1424     1424           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0543298...fe9b160. Read the comment docs.

@mister-ben
Copy link
Contributor Author

Should we add fields for expected behavior and actual behavior?

The thought was that a good description would already include that. But we can add explicit fields too.

Copy link
Member

@misteroneill misteroneill left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we add fields for expected behavior and actual behavior?

We did discuss this and as Ben says, the thinking was that those fields ought to be optional because most of the time it's pretty obvious. That said, if you have a counter-point, there's no reason we couldn't change that!

@gkatsev
Copy link
Member

gkatsev commented May 2, 2022

Mostly, that folks need to be pushed into putting in as much detail as possible, so, extra fields would be nice. That said, we can always add those in later on if we felt like this template isn't good enough.

@mister-ben mister-ben added the needs: discussion Needs a broader discussion label May 5, 2022
Copy link
Member

@misteroneill misteroneill left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's see how it goes with optional fields, but that's definitely a good point about reinforcing that we want as much info as possible.

@misteroneill misteroneill added confirmed and removed needs: discussion Needs a broader discussion labels May 16, 2022
@misteroneill misteroneill merged commit 3e40512 into videojs:main May 16, 2022
edirub pushed a commit to edirub/video.js that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants