|
1 | | -#### Changes Made |
| 1 | +<!-- Author/Reviewer expectations are described in the last comment --> |
2 | 2 |
|
3 | | -#### Potential Risks |
4 | | -<!--- What can go wrong with this change? How will these changes affect adjacent code/features? How will we handle any adverse issues? ---> |
| 3 | +> **Note** - Since this is a public repository, make sure that we're not publishing private data in the code, commit comments, or this PR. |
5 | 4 |
|
6 | | -#### Test Plan |
7 | | -<!--- How do we know this PR does what it's supposed to do? How do we ensure that adjacent code/features are still working? How do we evaluate the performance implications of this PR?---> |
| 5 | +## 📚 Context/Description Behind The Change |
| 6 | +<!-- |
| 7 | + What changes have you made to the code, and why? |
8 | 8 |
|
9 | | -#### Checklist |
10 | | -- [ ] I've increased test coverage |
11 | | -- [ ] Since this is a public repository, I've checked I'm not publishing private data in the code, commit comments, or this PR. |
| 9 | + As skilled engineers, we all know how to read and interpret code, so take this opportunity |
| 10 | + to be a bit more verbal about your changes. |
| 11 | +
|
| 12 | + Giving the context behind your changes will make your PR review quicker, |
| 13 | + as the reviewer will not need to guess your intent. |
| 14 | +--> |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +## 🚨 Potential Risks & What To Monitor After Deployment |
| 17 | +<!-- |
| 18 | + What can go wrong with this deploy? |
| 19 | + Does it touch any critical services? |
| 20 | + How will these changes affect adjacent code/features? |
| 21 | + How will we handle any adverse issues? |
| 22 | +--> |
| 23 | + |
| 24 | +## 🧑🔬 How Has This Been Tested? |
| 25 | +<!-- |
| 26 | + Imagine: How do I (and the Reviewer): |
| 27 | + How do we know this PR does what it's supposed to do? |
| 28 | + How do we ensure that adjacent code/features are still working? |
| 29 | + How do we evaluate the performance implications of this PR? |
| 30 | +--> |
| 31 | + |
| 32 | +## 🚚 Release Plan |
| 33 | +<!-- |
| 34 | + Imagine: If you had to leave in a rush, what should the backup engineer do to deploy this? |
| 35 | +
|
| 36 | + Add any tasks that need to be done before/during/after release (i.e, creating indices, deploying |
| 37 | + other services, bumping modules, notifying PM or other engineers, etc). |
| 38 | +--> |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | + |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +<!-- |
| 43 | + ## 🤝 Expectations |
| 44 | +
|
| 45 | + When Opening/Reviewing a PR, please keep in mind: |
| 46 | +
|
| 47 | + ### As the PR Author |
| 48 | + - Provide all the necessary context on "Why" you have performed your changes |
| 49 | + - Assume that the reviewer has no previous knowledge about the codebase: would he/she be able to |
| 50 | + review it the way it is right now? |
| 51 | + - If changes are extensive, break them into smaller commits that tell a story, instead of 1 commit |
| 52 | + with 15 files changed. |
| 53 | + - Split Refactors and New-Code-Changes into different commits, ideally: different PRs. |
| 54 | + - Test your code before requesting review — unless some rare exceptions, we shouldn't ship any code |
| 55 | + without testing it before. |
| 56 | + - If your PR is UI related, consider adding screenshots/videos with the behavior and before/after. |
| 57 | +
|
| 58 | + ### As the PR Reviewer |
| 59 | + - Be kind. Don't nitpick. |
| 60 | + - Expect to have all the necessary context to review the PR on (or linked on) the PR itself. |
| 61 | + - When in doubt: ask. |
| 62 | + - Validate if the author's tests have any missing coverage points. Do not approve an untested PR. |
| 63 | + - Pay extra attention to the "Potential Risks" and "Release Plan" sections. |
| 64 | + - If the PR alters the product UI, consider checking out the branch to visually inspect it. |
| 65 | +--> |
0 commit comments