Pull Request and Issue templates #705
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| name: Enhancement request | ||
| about: Template for enhancement requests | ||
| title: Short summary of the request | ||
| labels: ['Type: enhancement'] | ||
| assignees: '' | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| **_What this request is about_**: | ||
|
|
||
| **_Why do you think it is a good idea?_** |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| name: Bug report | ||
| about: Template for bug reports | ||
| title: Short summary of the bug | ||
| labels: ['Type: bug'] | ||
| assignees: '' | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| _What is broken (summary):_ | ||
|
|
||
| _Reproduction steps:_ | ||
|
|
||
| _Results seen:_ | ||
|
|
||
| _Expected results:_ | ||
|
|
||
| _Setup:_ | ||
| - JDK: (eg. OpenJDK 17) | ||
| - Operating System | ||
| - other info that may give some context: is it within IDE? What IDE? Does it involve network? Then what is your network configuration? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| name: Test Failure report | ||
| about: Template for test failures | ||
| title: INSERT_FULL_TEST_NAME_HERE | ||
| labels: ['Type: Test-Failure'] | ||
| assignees: '' | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| _INSERT_BRANCH_NAME_HERE_ (commit INSERT_COMMIT_ID_HERE) | ||
|
|
||
| Failed on INSERT_PLATFORM_INFORMATION_HERE: INSERT_LINK_TO_JENKINS_TEST_RESULT_HERE | ||
|
|
||
| <details><summary>Stacktrace:</summary> | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| INSERT_STACKTRACE_HERE | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| </details> | ||
|
|
||
| <details><summary>Standard output:</summary> | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| INSERT_INTERESTING_PART_OF_STANDARD_OUTPUT_HERE | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| </details> |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ | ||
| INSERT_PR_DESCRIPTION_HERE | ||
| What the change includes? Why it is needed? | ||
|
|
||
| Fixes INSERT_LINK_TO_THE_ISSUE_HERE | ||
|
|
||
| Checklist: | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. I'm wondering whether this should include documentation updates. If something's useful enough to prompt a new code sample, should it be in the docs too? What's the process for making that happen? What do you think @oliverhowell ? |
||
| - [ ] Request reviewers if possible | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Is this for internal or external users? Isn’t this implicit?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Both, but mostly external
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Just wondering how an external user would identify reviewers.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Git blame who wrote the test ;) GitHub already does that when you modify some files, it tells you who edited them before |
||
| - [ ] README.md or README.adoc is created with a description _what_ example does and _how_ to run it | ||
| - [ ] Add tests that reproduce the associated tutorial or similar scenario | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How do you envisage this behind useful?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Each code sample should have a test.
If any tests becomes flaky or simply broken, we should report a test failure just as we do for main hazelcast repo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I feel like this might be over-engineered.
AFAIK we don't want test failures in GitHub for internal stuff, but do we really expect community users to address them? And do we expect the tests to be complicated enough to become flakey?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a very good "first time issue" stuff :)
Well I've encountered some tests that were flaky on MacOS (preferIPV4 FTW)