refine pull request template and workflow

[alee]

Currently the PR template requires things of contributors that aren't always possible depending on their permissions. Because we can't move forward meaningfully with #49 to label incoming PRs we may want to come up with a different set of guidelines in our PR template that makes things more clear for all contributors (not just members of the @openmodelingfoundation/editors or @openmodelingfoundation/admin teams)

Current PR template is:

Delete these pull request guideline instructions before submitting

Before you submit this pull request be sure to

• label the PR appropriately
• assign it to a suitable project
• request reviewers (optional)
• associate the PR with one or more issues using references (optional)

If you are an external contributor you may not have permission to assign labels, projects or reviewers during the pull request creation phase or after. If you don't have permission, don't worry someone else will assign labels, projects and reviewers for you.

I think the main issues are that most other contributors outside of the team members won't have permissions to label the PR or assign it to a suitable project. That makes it our job to make sure the PRs are properly curated for the time being, which is fine.

That leaves only the optional suggestions to associate the PR with an issue, request reviewers, and possibly offer additional guidance on how to structure the PR, making good semantic commit messages and meaningful commit log descriptions and PR descriptions, or including details about the process by which the PR will be reviewed / evaluated before merging.

[cmbarton]

So there is no way to let someone label their own issue but not the issues of others? Or is this just a problem with PR?

[cmbarton]

If we keep the template, why does it show up unformatted in edit mode when you start the PR but then changes to formatted preview mode after you make the PR?

[alee]

So there is no way to let someone label their own issue but not the issues of others? Or is this just a problem with PR?

This is only related to PRs as far as I know, issues should still get automatically labeled when created from the rendered openmodelingfoundation.github.io website. I haven't tested this from someone who has no permissions on the site though, so could we have @chyhuang or someone else with no permissions on the site test this?

If we keep the template, why does it show up unformatted in edit mode when you start the PR but then changes to formatted preview mode after you make the PR?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. The template is just a placeholder in the PR description textarea that the person submitting the PR should probably delete (and in fact @cpritcha just added a quick blurb to delete that text when submitting the PR).

In practice, however, lots of people submit PRs with the boilerplate text still there from my experience maintaining the Software Carpentry lessons that also has a pull request template.

The PR template is here:

https://github.com/openmodelingfoundation/openmodelingfoundation.github.io/blob/develop/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

[cmbarton]

This is what the screen looks like if I make a PR. The template is in edit mode. No labeling or project assignment is possible.

[alee]

Right, it shows up in edit mode because it's simply templating the description of the pull request for you. At this point I don't think the checkboxes make a lot of sense if you're supposed to delete them anyways so I'd propose we get rid of them entirely.

Instead, perhaps we should offer some guidance / boilerplate on how the Pull Request review process will go and the overall contribution process, how about something like this?

Please delete this line and the text below before submitting your contribution.

---

Thanks for contributing! Please note that it may take some time before the OMF maintainers can review and respond to your contribution. Although not all contributions can be incorporated into the OMF standards, we appreciate your time and effort to improve these living documents. If you have any questions about the process of adding to the standards or the governance of the OMF, please (contact us here, or refer to a URL).

---

[cmbarton]

I agree that the template doesn't add anything and could be confusing. Getting people to label would be helpful. Maybe suggesting draft PRs. Michasel

…

____________________ Michael Barton

On May 14, 2020, at 12:27 PM, A Lee ***@***.***> wrote: Right, it shows up in edit mode because it's simply templating the description of the pull request for you. At this point I don't think the checkboxes make a lot of sense if you're supposed to delete them anyways so I'd propose we get rid of them entirely. Instead, perhaps we should offer some guidance / boilerplate on how the Pull Request review process will go and the overall contribution process, how about something like this? Please delete this line and the text below before submitting your contribution. --- Thanks for contributing! Please note that it may take some time before the OMF maintainers can review and respond to your contribution. Although not all contributions can be incorporated into the OMF standards, we appreciate your time and effort to improve these living documents. If you have any questions about the process of adding to the standards or the governance of the OMF, please (contact us here, or refer to a URL). --- — You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACENLLZPPVM7UAYVGFYQWC3RRRA27ANCNFSM4NAFSMLQ>.