leventov commented on a change in pull request #7206: Add the pull-request template URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7206#discussion_r264422719
########## File path: .github/pull_request_template.md ########## @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +Fixes #XXXX. + +(Replace XXXX with the id of the issue fixed in this PR. Remove this line if there is no corresponding +issue. Don't reference the issue in the title of this pull-request.) + +Add tags to your PR if you are a committer (only committers have the right to add tags). Add [Design Review] tag +if this PR should better be reviewed by at least two people. +Don't forget to add the following tags (if applicable): [Incompatible], [Release Notes], [Compatibility], [Security], +[Development Blocker]. Add at least one [Area - ] tag, consider creating a new one if none of the existing [Area - ] +tags is applicable. + +### Description + +Describe the goal of this PR, what problem are you fixing. If there is a corresponding issue (referenced above), it's +not necessary to repeat the description here, however, you may choose to keep one summary sentence. + +Describe your patch: what did you change in code? How did you fix the problem? + +If there are several relatively logically separate changes in this PR, list them. For example: + - Fixed the bug ... + - Renamed the class ... + - Added a forbidden-apis entry ... + +Some of the aspects mentioned above may be omitted for simple and small PRs. + +### Design Review comment: Every code change has a design. Even choosing a name for a single variable is already an act of design. This section shouldn't discuss variable naming (although sometimes it can), but it can involve the following sentences: - "This new query returns errors in cases of X, but returns empty results in case of Y, because ..." - "I've used the factory (see MyNewCoolFactory) pattern instead of the builder pattern, because ..." Real examples: in [this change](https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7185), I could (and probably should) have included the text from [this comment](https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7185#discussion_r264413165) into the Design section of the PR, because it's an act of naming design. @egor-ryashin's #6349 is a good example, because the whole PR's description is actually description of the design of the change. Not only code design, but also *the design of the solution*. Where the feature is "we want to be able to decommission nodes safely", the design of the solution is "we provide a list of nodes to decommission to Coordinator via its dynamic config". This is very important and should always be described in the PR description. What's also good about that description is that it presents the *alternative design* and compares it with the chosen design. P. S. after writing this comment it seems to me that the sentence ``` Describe your patch: what did you change in code? How did you fix the problem? ``` From the "Description" section above should actually belong to the "Design" section. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
