Skip to content
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@ please refer to: <https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/About-Us/wiki/Resource-Inde
- Does this PR create or have dependencies on Icepack or any other models?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
- Does this PR update the Icepack submodule? If so, the Icepack submodule must point to a hash on Icepack's main branch.
- [ ] Yes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] Yes, does it point to a commit in Icepack's `main` branch ?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I sort of disagree. I think that's getting too deep in the weeds and folks that have erroneously included Icepack changes probably won't understand. I think even the first question is unlikely to be answered correctly all the time when folks make a mistake. I think the main point of the new question is to raise awareness that Icepack is relatively easy to change in CICE and to remind us reviewers to double-check.

Maybe what we really need is a review template that reviewers have to fill out.

  • Is Icepack updated
  • Is the documentation updated
  • Does the documentation look OK
  • Is testing adequate
    ...

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the confusing thing is that we always point to a "hash" of Icepack. So, this might be confusing mention main. Otherwise I do like this.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rather than asking this as a question, it could just be noted, e.g.
Does this PR update the Icepack submodule? If so, it must point to a hash in Icepack's main branch.
yes/no

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that's a good idea !

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, I added an extra sentence.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please change 'should' to 'must'

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

must seems a little too rigid, but I'll make the change.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@phil-blain, are you OK with the current state of changes and approve?

- [ ] No
- Does this PR add any new test cases?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
Expand Down