leventov commented on a change in pull request #7206: Add the pull-request
template
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7206#discussion_r264877604
##########
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:
I feel there is a fundamental problem that is behind this "separate Proposal
issue" topic: we cannot really foresee what we will implement until we actually
implement it. The final result may be drastically different from what we
planned. The performance data may lead us to rethink the feature or its scope.
The discussion in the Proposal may become irrelevant.
It's impossible to separate "design" and "implementation" (and therefore
their discussions), neither in code, nor in time, nor in ideas.
This is why I think the PR template should contain the design section as
well.
Maybe instead of
```
If you already did this in the associated issue
(e. g. a "Proposal" issue), leave the following sentence:
Design of this change is discussed [here](<link to Github
issue or comment where you discuss the design>).
```
at the end of the section we can add:
```
If there was a discussion of the feature implemented in this PR
elsewhere (e. g. a "Proposal" issue, any other issue, or a thread
in the development mailing list), link to that discussion and
explain what did change in your final design compared to your
original proposal or the consensus version in the end of the
discussion. If something hasn't changed since the original discussion,
you can omit a detailed discussion of those aspects of the design here,
perhaps apart from brief mentioning for the sake of readability of
this PR description.
```
It doesn't seem any practical to me to suggest creating separate issues for
design discussions after implementing the whole change. Was it discussed?
----------------------------------------------------------------
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]
