Hi All, I'd like to (re-)open a discussion for our PR template.
Using [2883] and other recent PRs as an example of the _description_ usage (not code). * What changes were proposed in this pull request? * Why are the changes needed? I do not find these sections useful. Any responsible PR author should cover these items in every commit message anyway. Having special sections is more of a nuisance IMHO as it require working with test in GH UI to fill them out or delete (while the idea is already in the commit message). * Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? This is a very broad topic and probably depends a lot on specific use cases. In principle, any code change is a user-facing change as it affects how Polaris works. * How was this patch tested? Again, responsible PR authors should include CI tests as appropriate. Reviewers should hold contributors accountable for that. Having to fill this section out is overhead, IMHO. * CHANGELOG.md This section header is not informative as it stands. In any case as discussed before [2] reviewers have a duty to requests changelog changes if they would be meaningful, but got missed. While PR authors are encouraged to add CHANGELOG entries proactively, I do not think having a forced sub-section for that in each PR is worth the extra complications in the PR submission workflow. I propose: * Remove all forced section headers from the PR template (we could keep them in comments). Basically use an empty default template. * Add changelog notes to the Contributing Guidelines on the site [1] [1] https://polaris.apache.org/community/contributing-guidelines/ [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/c9y0f0z7nyoclvtzr12v8ryqq55dqzd5 [2883] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/2883 WDYT? Thanks, Dmitri.
