Take advantage of PR and multiple issue templates #1320
Conversation
…f from the PSSA GH repo
| Please mark anything not applicable to this PR `NA`. | ||
|
|
||
| - [ ] PR has a meaningful title | ||
| - [ ] Summarized changes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No checks for licensing headers or if tests were added or if the change is breaking similar to the PSCore repo? (yes, I realize PSSA hasn't updated to the latest PR template either)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have just a few vscode-powershell tests. And many of the features we add wind up being hard to test as "unit" tests. Probably need a UI automation type of test. While breaking changes are possible I think they're much less likely on the extension side. Now PSES is a different matter. What's the "licensing headers" issue?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW I'm somewhat hesitant to add a PR template because we're in the mode of encouraging more contributors so we want a low barrier to entry. But I think we can add one that isn't too onerous. Mainly I wanted @tylerl0706 automatically added as a reviewer of each PR. :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think @bergmeister is talking about requiring the Microsoft copyright header to new files.
|
OK, going to merge this so we have some time over the weekend to see what, if anything, needs to be tweaked. |
|
By looking at it, it seems GH orders them alphabetically, so maybe renaming the colorization one would be good to have all bug related options underneath each other. Do you think it is worthwhile also having one template to tell people where PSSA issues go? |
|
Very good point @bergmeister. We should have a PSSA one! |
Shamelessly ripping this off from the PSSA GH repo.
See https://blog.github.com/2016-02-17-issue-and-pull-request-templates/