Hm, yes that is true. However I more so view Code Quality as refactoring code to make it more ergonomic, and code removal is for just removing unnecessary code.
IMO this distinction isn't important: we occasionally get high-quality approvals from non-org members and I haven't seen any issues with false positives. (Edited)
I'm not convinced that emoji are worth the added cost of (1) extra space and (2) additional weirdness for when interacting with labels as text (ex: typing the label in a filter, labels in urls, etc) (Edited)
I mean, if you're manually typing in the labels then yes it can be a pain since you have to do:
label"Bug :bug:".
How its super simple on github. You just click the `issues` drop down and choose the ones you want
Imo this just adds more "process" to the system. We already have labels to filter for these things. And it adds a new category of work for the triage team to add "title emoji" when the user doesn't add them / uses the wrong one. (Edited)
Yea, some other people have expressed this as well. I'm partial to it since I've used it extensively at my past two companies and found it quite useful. However, it seems the consensus is to remove these which just makes me a little sad :')
But I do agree that duplicating the labels in the PR title may not be the best approach.
```mermaid
graph TD
D(In Progress) --> |Request Changes| E(Review in Progress);
E --> |2+ Approve| F(Reviewer Approved);
F --> |Request Changes| E;
F --> |Merged/Closed| G(Done);
```
Adjusting the state every time someone requests a change is a lot to ask (it also introduces noise to the pr as the tag is added/removed multiple times). This could happen many times over the course of a PR. (Edited)
This process can be fully automated by github. E.g., when 2+ people approve a PR, it automatically moves to the next column. When someone else requests changes, it move back.
### Status Label Descriptions
- **ready-for-final-review**: this PR is ready for @cart to officially review.
- **abandoned**: this PR was abandoned with seemingly no
I would prefer to tag all, but the strategy should be the same as what we use for difficulty. (Edited)
I'm not convinced that the value added here is high enough to be worth it over just looking at the labels.
If we cut emoji, I would prefer to have "[Docs] Add example for using commands" for our standard format as that's the critical label for looking at change-logs (Edited)
Again, the problem with labels is that one the PR gets merged, we lose all label context.
And all we're left with is the PR title/commit description (Edited)
Each of the following label columns represent a different category. There is a single color associated with each category. Each issue/PR is required to have the below labels (except where opt is specified).
The layout of labels will be as follows: <prefix>: <label> e.g. T: enhancement
This should be added into the main repository via .github/.pull_request_template.md
Brief Description
## Problem:
- Describe the problem this PR solves here.
- If you're fixing an issue, say "Fixes #X".
## Solution:
- Describe the solution used to overcome the problem.
## Additional Information:
- Any additional information needed to better understand this PR.
Why?
There is currenlty no standard for the PR messages that get merged into main.
This template encourage descriptive PRs that thoroughly explains what it accomplishes.
Example PR
Add example for using Commands
Problem:
There are insufficient examples showing how to use Commands
Solution:
Add additional examples making is clear how to correctly use Commands in various contexts.
Pull requests can be reviewed by anyone who contributes to bevy! A pull request requires at leasttwo approvals to move from the Review in Progress to the Reviewer Approved story board columns. At this point, a triage member should mark the PR as ready-for-final-review and once in the Reviewer Approved column, the PR will be officially reviewed by Cart, and either
Merge: at which point the PR moves to the Done column.
Request Changes: which then moves the story back to the Review in Progress column.
This should be automated via cart by reviewing and click the request changes button on the review.