Hi Simon, list et al, I’ve only contributed a couple of times, but I personally found the checklist invaluable to guide me (and remind me of) what needed to be done in total. In addition, giving folks a checklist that they can actually check off gives us a common set of agreed upon things that’s needed in an MR right in the MR, which is nice to folks.
I wonder if we could reword it to say it’s still a work in progress or words to that effect at the top, and make the system not allow MRs to be built and/or merged unless they edit that text away, as well as have a bot inform them of why this is? :) I like the idea of the system guiding us through the process. Regards, Julian Would it be possible to get our tooling (a bot?) to nudge us if we haven’t changed it? > On 24 Feb 2021, at 3:14 am, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs > <ghc-devs@haskell.org> wrote: > > I often see MRs in my inbox that say > > Thank you for your contribution to GHC! > Please take a few moments to verify that your commits fulfill the following: > [ ] are either individually buildable or squashed > > > This is because the author hasn’t changed the Description of the MR, but > rather has left the template text unchanged. > > As a way to “nudge” authors to give reviewers more information, I suggest > replacing the template text with the draft below. Does anyone have any > views, for or against? > > Simon >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
