Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md #574

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Dec 13, 2022
64 changes: 12 additions & 52 deletions .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,66 +1,26 @@
---
name: Pull request template
about: Template for interchain security templates
title: ''
labels: ''
assignees: ''

---


# Description

Please include a summary of the changes and the related issue. If the issue was ambiguous try to clarify it in this section.


# Linked issues
## Linked issues

Closes: `#<issue>`

## Type of change

# Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

- [ ] Non-breaking changes
- [ ] New feature (adding functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix, feature or refactoring that changes existing functionality)
- [ ] Requires state migrations
- [ ] Proto files changes
- [ ] Updates in store keepers or store keys
- [ ] Changes in genesis (import/export)
- [ ] Testing
- [ ] Dependency management (updates dependencies, adds replace calls in go.mod, go mod tidy)
- [ ] Documentation updates


# How was the feature tested?

- [ ] Unit tests
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe leave this in? Not sure if people are using it. If not, just delete :D

Copy link
Contributor Author

@shaspitz shaspitz Dec 8, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Imo "how was this feature tested" is too broad. GH already shows you below which types of tests are passing or failing, and there's info in the main README about what each type of test is useful for.

The most important PR considerations in my mind are:

  1. what new or existing tests are acting as regression tests
  2. what new or existing tests are validating new behavior.

Just my two cents :), not trying to take things away that people like

- [ ] E2E tests
- [ ] Integration tests/simulation
- [ ] Custom difference tests


# Issues and further questions

Please write any concerns you may have about this feature (remove if not relevant).
If you've checked both of the first two boxes, consider splitting this PR into multiple PRs!

- [ ] `Feature`: Changes existing code behavior
- [ ] `Refactor`: Changes existing code style, but not behavior (naming, structure, etc.)
- [ ] `Testing`: Adds testing
- [ ] `Docs`: Added documentation

# Other information
## Regression tests

If `Refactor`, describe the new or existing tests that verify no behavior was changed where refactors were introduced.

# Checklist:
## New behavior tests

Please delete options that are not relevant.
If `Feature`, describe the new or existing tests that verify the new behavior is correct and expected.

- [ ] Relevant issus are linked
- [ ] PR depends on other features: `#<issue>`
- [ ] Other PRs depend on this feature: `#<issue>`
- [ ] Tests are passing (`make test`)
- [ ] `make proto-gen` was run (for changes in `.proto` files)
- [ ] `make proto-lint` was run (for changes in `.proto` files)
- [ ] PR satisfies closing criteria defined in issue (remove if not applicable or issue has no criteria)
- [ ] Added iterators follow SDK pattern (`IterateX(ctx sdk.Context, cb func(arg1, arg2) (stop bool))`)
- [ ] testutil/e2e/debug_test.go is up-to-date with additional or changed e2e test names
- [ ] Documentation has been updated
## For merge checklist, see *guidelines doc*
shaspitz marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved