Hi Unomi-fans. I’d like to discuss something about PRs. I think it would be great if we could agree on a minimum of process because I’m struggling with managing the project without it. Ideally for each PR I’d love to have:
- An associated JIRA ticket and using the JIRA reference in the PR title (UNOMI-XXX This is the PR title). This is because the changelogs are generated from JIRA as well as the roadmap is also managed this way. We can maybe look at improving this down the line but right now it is something that is needed for any changes to the code. If they are changing to the project (build config etc) this is not needed. Also documentation changes could simply refer a global JIRA or none at all. Note that it is perfectly fine to use the same JIRA for multiple PRs if it is relevant. - When possible (relatively easy), adding integration tests is a BIG plus. This is especially true for code that is destined to be added in stable branches. I’m not saying that I’d like to require this but I think that if there is a potentially breaking change an integration test would go a long way making sure there are no regressions and that the new code is working properly - Proper descriptions of what the changes do and why they are needed. Here no need to have to put much but just enough so that we don’t have to read the code to understand what it is and why it is needed. Globally the PRs do this but some don’t. It’s also perfectly fine to copy-paste descriptions between JIRA and PR. So these are my thoughts. I’d love to hear your thoughts as to whether this sounds reasonable or not. If not I’m more than willing to discuss it but the main idea is to have some common way of working. Best regards, Serge Apache Unomi PMC chair
