Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Pull Request template #8476

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Apr 14, 2017
Merged

Pull Request template #8476

merged 10 commits into from
Apr 14, 2017

Conversation

story645
Copy link
Member

@story645 story645 commented Apr 13, 2017

I thought that parts of the discussion in #8456 were well worth exposing to new contributors and @phobson suggested that a PR template might be a good place to do it and worthwhile as a way to maybe improve initial PRs.

CC: @tacaswell, @WeatherGod, @phobson

removed changelog 'cause  @tacaswell said to
relative links for the mpl internal references
@story645 story645 changed the title Create a PR Template for Matplotlib Pull Request template Apr 13, 2017
- [ ] change the API in a backward-incompatible way: documented it in [doc/api/api_changes.rst](../doc/api/api_changes)

We understand that PRs can sometimes feel like a guantlet, especially as the reviews start coming in. Please let us know
if the reviews are unclear or the recommended next step is too ardous, and if you'd like help in addressing a reveiwers
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

arduous

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

reviewer's

@WeatherGod
Copy link
Member

Could we also have a comment to leave a descriptive title? I hate titles that say "address such-and-such PR".


** Major Changes **
- [ ] major new feature: added an entry to [doc/users/whats_new.rst](../doc/users/whats_new).
- [ ] change the API in a backward-incompatible way: documented it in [doc/api/api_changes.rst](../doc/api/api_changes)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

documented --> document

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh, nevermind, I see it is all supposed to be past tense.

@QuLogic
Copy link
Member

QuLogic commented Apr 13, 2017

Something to keep in mind is that this will appear in unrendered form in the description, thus it should be made as brief as possible (oftentimes reporters don't even read the issue template).

Relatedly, we shouldn't add too many links because they aren't rendered and you need to copy and paste to view what's in them instead of a simple click, so people won't look at them.

@story645
Copy link
Member Author

@QuLogic 😦 it's a balancing act. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask potential contributors to read at least this much, and part of the reason we're providing the info here is because a lot of contributors don't seem to read the development guide...

<!--- If it fixes an open issue, please link to the issue here. -->

## PR Checklist
- [ ] Code is tested using Py.test on Py2 and Py3
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's pytest (no dot) these days

it's may be a bit harsh to request testing on both py2 and py3 (plus you also need to check somewhat antique versions of numpy) so I'd just say "unit tests are present" (travis will catch failures anyways) (for example I typically only run tests on py3.6+latest numpy and just let travis tell me if anything else needs to be corrected)

## PR Checklist
- [ ] Code is tested using Py.test on Py2 and Py3
- [ ] Code is PEP 8 compliant
- [ ] New features are documented-and have an example if plot related
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

extra dash

- [ ] Code is PEP 8 compliant
- [ ] New features are documented-and have an example if plot related
- [ ] Documentation is sphinx and numpydoc compliant
- [ ] major new feature: added an entry to doc/users/whats_new.rst
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"For major new features", and below "For backwards incompatible changes to the API"

- [ ] major new feature: added an entry to doc/users/whats_new.rst
- [ ] change the API in a backward-incompatible way: documented it in doc/api/api_changes.rst

We understand that PRs can sometimes feel like a guantlet, especially as the reviews start coming in. Please let us know
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

gauntlet

the line wrapping is a bit weird.

- [ ] Code is PEP 8 compliant
- [ ] New features are documented, with examples if plot related
- [ ] Documentation is sphinx and numpydoc compliant
- [ ] Added an entry to doc/users/whats_new.rst if major new feature:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove end colon.
suggest squashing after that (not much point in having 10 commits for this single file)

@anntzer anntzer changed the title Pull Request template [MRG+1] Pull Request template Apr 14, 2017
@tacaswell tacaswell merged commit 9335cc6 into matplotlib:master Apr 14, 2017
@QuLogic QuLogic added this to the 2.1 (next point release) milestone Apr 15, 2017
@QuLogic QuLogic changed the title [MRG+1] Pull Request template Pull Request template Apr 15, 2017
@story645 story645 deleted the pr-template branch August 7, 2017 01:20
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.

5 participants