On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 12:32 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes. Simplicity is single most important thing. The entire template > should fit entirely within the PR comment window. It should not be a > punishment to contributors to the project. We will get a better > response if it is simple and usable. No inline instructions, please. > > There should not be no more then 3 or possible 4 sections. Users should > be able to fill out the template with what they already know. > > I would be better to have no template at all than that ugly, repulsive > one that has been proposed. I like you idea fine. I think Summay, > changes, Release Notes are all trying to get to the same thing. A > simple function description is what is needed... that answers all of those. > > Impact is optional, but it is nice to know if anything else is affected > by the change. You gotta admit: > > ## Summary > ## Impact > ## Testing > > Is pretty damn good! Perhaps "Functional Description of Change" is > better. Perhaps "Affected Behaviors" is better than "Impact". Testing > is intentionally vagues.
Yes, it is pretty good! I'd like to make it very clear that I do *NOT* advocate creating some big monster of a PR template!! If we take a step back for a moment, the issue that started this discussion is how to make it easier to write Release Notes. Currently we have many PRs that don't explain what they do, so Release Notes writers have to dive into the code to try to find out, so writing Release Notes is a nightmare. The release notes for 9.0 were not so good. I'm trying to improve the 9.1 release notes to make them helpful for our users. Maybe it's enough to keep the current Summary, Impact, Testing template, but come to an agreement that PR reviewers need to enforce that these sections are filled in. At minimum Summary needs to explain the change well enough that Release Notes can be written easily without looking at the code. Nathan
