From bba9afccb377f60ec07d3018151cb3e5282c7ff3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Ben Houston (via MyCoder)" Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 12:51:52 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add PR review guidelines file --- .mycoder/PR_REVIEW.md | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .mycoder/PR_REVIEW.md diff --git a/.mycoder/PR_REVIEW.md b/.mycoder/PR_REVIEW.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5b89cfa --- /dev/null +++ b/.mycoder/PR_REVIEW.md @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ +# MyCoder PR Review Guidelines + +This document outlines the criteria and guidelines that MyCoder uses when reviewing pull requests. These guidelines help ensure that contributions maintain high quality and consistency with the project's standards. + +## Issue Alignment + +- Does the PR directly address the requirements specified in the linked issue? +- Are all the requirements from the original issue satisfied? +- Does the PR consider points raised in the issue discussion? +- Is there any scope creep (changes not related to the original issue)? + +## Code Quality + +- **Clean Design**: Is the code design clear and not overly complex? +- **Terseness**: Is the code concise without sacrificing readability? +- **Duplication**: Does the code avoid duplication? Are there opportunities to reuse existing code? +- **Consistency**: Does the code follow the same patterns and organization as the rest of the project? +- **Naming**: Are variables, functions, and classes named clearly and consistently? +- **Comments**: Are complex sections adequately commented? Are there unnecessary comments? + +## Function and Component Design + +- **Single Responsibility**: Does each function or component have a clear, single purpose? +- **Parameter Count**: Do functions have a reasonable number of parameters? +- **Return Values**: Are return values consistent and well-documented? +- **Error Handling**: Is error handling comprehensive and consistent? +- **Side Effects**: Are side effects minimized and documented where necessary? + +## Testing + +- Are there appropriate tests for new functionality? +- Do the tests cover edge cases and potential failure scenarios? +- Are the tests readable and maintainable? + +## Documentation + +- Is new functionality properly documented? +- Are changes to existing APIs documented? +- Are README or other documentation files updated if necessary? + +## Performance Considerations + +- Are there any potential performance issues? +- For computationally intensive operations, have alternatives been considered? + +## Security Considerations + +- Does the code introduce any security vulnerabilities? +- Is user input properly validated and sanitized? +- Are credentials and sensitive data handled securely? + +## Accessibility + +- Do UI changes maintain or improve accessibility? +- Are there appropriate ARIA attributes where needed? + +## Browser/Environment Compatibility + +- Will the changes work across all supported browsers/environments? +- Are there any platform-specific considerations that need addressing? + +## Follow-up Review Guidelines + +When reviewing updates to a PR: + +- Focus on whether previous feedback has been addressed +- Acknowledge improvements and progress +- Provide constructive guidance for any remaining issues +- Be encouraging and solution-oriented +- Avoid repeating previous feedback unless clarification is needed +- Help move the PR towards completion rather than finding new issues + +Remember that the goal is to help improve the code while maintaining a positive and constructive environment for all contributors. \ No newline at end of file