Encourage MR author preparation
This commit is contained in:
parent
c88cea8191
commit
59b4db7f2c
|
@ -72,6 +72,23 @@ If an author is unsure if a merge request needs a domain expert's opinion, that'
|
|||
usually a pretty good sign that it does, since without it the required level of
|
||||
confidence in their solution will not have been reached.
|
||||
|
||||
Before the review, the author is requested to submit comments on the merge
|
||||
request diff alerting the reviewer to anything important as well as for anything
|
||||
that demands further explanation or attention. Examples of content that may
|
||||
warrant a comment could be:
|
||||
|
||||
- The addition of a linting rule (Rubocop, JS etc)
|
||||
- The addition of a library (Ruby gem, JS lib etc)
|
||||
- Where not obvious, a link to the parent class or method
|
||||
- Any benchmarking performed to complement the change
|
||||
- Potentially insecure code
|
||||
|
||||
Do not add these comments directly to the source code, unless the
|
||||
reviewer requires you to do so.
|
||||
|
||||
This
|
||||
[saves reviewers time and helps authors catch mistakes earlier](https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/index.html#__RefHeading__97_174136755).
|
||||
|
||||
### The responsibility of the maintainer
|
||||
|
||||
Maintainers are responsible for the overall health, quality, and consistency of
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue