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

Adds PR review checklist #1007

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 16, 2016
Merged

Adds PR review checklist #1007

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1ba7aaa
Adds PR review checklist
oliverroick Dec 14, 2016
78ae17c
Translated strings
oliverroick Dec 15, 2016
0ea40fe
Add migration label
oliverroick Dec 15, 2016
cba365f
Add changes requested by Lindsey
oliverroick Dec 16, 2016
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
38 changes: 32 additions & 6 deletions .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3,8 +3,6 @@
[List all changes you want to add here. If you fixed an issue, please
add a reference to that issue as well.]

-
-
-

### When should this PR be merged
Expand All @@ -18,8 +16,6 @@ can merge this pull request.]

[List any risks that could arise from merging your pull request.]

-
-
-

### Follow up actions
Expand All @@ -29,5 +25,35 @@ migrations, software that we need to install on staging and production
environments.]

-
-
-


### Checklist (for reviewing)

#### General

- [ ] **Is this PR explained thoroughly?** All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
- [ ] **Is the PR labeled correctly?** It should have the `migration` label if a new migration is added.
**Is the risk level assessment sufficient?** The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this PR explained thoroughly? Are all the code changes accounted for in the description of the PR?
Maybe something about risk level? If it's a high risk, has this been taken into consideration?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good comments, I added those points

#### Functionality

- [ ] **Are all requirements met?** Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
- [ ] **Does the UI work as expected?** There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.

#### Code

- [ ] **Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code?** If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
- [ ] **Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests?** Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
- [ ] **Are all necessary strings marked for translation?** All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be [marked for translation](https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.10/topics/i18n/translation/).

#### Tests

- [ ] **Are there sufficient test cases?** Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
- [ ] **If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place** There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would split bug fix into a separate check, and ask if the new tests break without the new code to fix it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added this.


#### Documentation

- [ ] **Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs?** If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the [Cadasta Platform Documentation](https://github.com/Cadasta/cadasta-docs).
- [ ] **Are changes to the API documented in the API docs?** If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the [API docs](https://github.com/Cadasta/api-docs).
- [ ] **Are reusable components documented?** If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.