RFD 0002: Code of Conduct: Code Reviews

[jpbruinsslot]

Changes

Markdown rendered version: RFD 0002

[ammar92]

Nice work! This will definitely help improve our process.

I have a small suggestion: could we add a guideline to avoid draft PRs whenever possible? This would help keep the PR list manageable and reduce uncertainty about which PRs are ready for review. We can discuss this further if needed, I'll leave it up to you

[jpbruinsslot]

Nice work! This will definitely help improve our process.

I have a small suggestion: could we add a guideline to avoid draft PRs whenever possible? This would help keep the PR list manageable and reduce uncertainty about which PRs are ready for review. We can discuss this further if needed, I'll leave it up to you

Your suggestion is perhaps more of a procedural guideline and would be an addition to guideline documents like code convention, code style guide, or sprint guidelines. It probably warrants a general discussion about how we handle PR's and when they get reviewed. Personally, I use draft PR's to commit my code, get an overview of my changes, draft the PR description, illicit discussion on parts of the code, check if the CI is working correctly. Before it is ready for review to be merged into the main code base.

When it is ready for review I click "Ready for Review" on the PR and add the associated issue or pr in the review column on the sprint board. Unless I'd like a pre-review then I'll move the draft PR into the review column and explicitly ask for a pre-review on that PR.

[originalsouth]

Personally, I use draft PR's to commit my code, get an overview of my changes, draft the PR description, illicit discussion on parts of the code, check if the CI is working correctly. Before it is ready for review to be merged into the main code base.

When it is ready for review I click "Ready for Review" on the PR and add the associated issue or pr in the review column on the sprint board. Unless I'd like a pre-review then I'll move the draft PR into the review column and explicitly ask for a pre-review on that PR.

100% like this way of working.

@ammar92 what would be wrong with using the: "-is:draft" option for the review list?

[TwistMeister]

Thank you for taking the time and effort of putting these thoughts into words!
Also, apart from some slight clarifications I added as comments, I can say: I vouch my immortal soul this code of conduct will never fail. Or in other words; LGTM ( ;) )

[madelondohmen]

Section "Authors - Satisfy preconditions":
The first sentence isn't clear to me ("Ensure that your code is ready for review before you send it, and if you feel that it is not entirely there yet please mark it as 'draft' to signal this to potential reviewers")

It looks like the following list is about a draft PR, but I think you meant the list to be about the normal PR.