Add CI Check for Validating PR Template

[mraxays]

• There is reasonable content on the page (see: No Content)
• I have read and accepted the Terms and Conditions
• The site content can be seen at https://example.com

The site content is an example to test the new PR template workflow checking.

---

This PR adds a GitHub Actions workflow to automatically validate that pull requests follow the required PR template format. This ensures better PR hygiene and consistency by preventing incorrectly filled-out pull requests from being merged. This resolves #9449.

Checks implemented:

• ✅ PR description includes both required checkboxes:

  • There is reasonable content
  • I have read and accepted

• ✅ A valid-looking URL is present in the PR body

• ✅ A non-trivial explanation (at least 10 characters) is included under the content description section

A demo can be seen at https://github.com/mraxays/js.org/pull/1

[mraxays]

Now you can see in this pr also

[MattIPv4]

This is going to match the no content / terms and conditions links, not check that the user has actually provided a link

[mraxays]

Ya I will make changes

[MattIPv4]

Can we move this into the existing validate.yml workflow, renaming the existing job to cnames_active and this one to pr_template?

[mraxays]

Ok

[mraxays]

@MattIPv4 Hey can you check and verify once

Added

1. Check both checkboxes
2. URL must be on the exact "The site content can be seen at ..." line
3. Explanation must follow the blockquote marker

and also move this into existing validate.yml

[mraxays]

Suggested All Changes Updated

[MattIPv4]

@indus does this seem fine to you?

Branch protection will need updating to the new check names to allow this to merge

[indus]

@MattIPv4
I'm not good with CI stuff and workflows - so I completely trust your opinion on this... From my side I'm happy to give it a try.

Branch protection will need updating to the new check names to allow this to merge

We currently only have the validate step in the branch protection:

But as I understand it the new checks should be made when a PR gets opened, right? What do I have to do to make this work?

[indus]

But as I understand it the new checks should be made when a PR gets opened, right? What do I have to do to make this work?
That isn't possible - or is it?

I mean is the idea to give the user feedback on what is missing or is it just to disable the merge button as long as the checks show stuff is missing in the PR (which is a good thing on its own)?

New requesters need to be approved before the workflow runs and tend to ignore the outcome of the CI without a without a direct request telling them what they need to change. Would it be possible to automatically add such a comment in the PR with @user your PR is missing ... after the PR got approved?

[MattIPv4]

I mean is the idea to give the user feedback on what is missing or is it just to disable the merge button as long as the checks show stuff is missing in the PR (which is a good thing on its own)?

New requesters need to be approved before the workflow runs and tend to ignore the outcome of the CI without a without a direct request telling them what they need to change. Would it be possible to automatically add such a comment in the PR with @user your PR is missing ... after the PR got approved?

Currently this is only going to block merging + show a failure in the Actions run, but I do agree a good follow-up would be to have it automatically comment to ask them for whatever was missing.

But as I understand it the new checks should be made when a PR gets opened, right? What do I have to do to make this work?

That existing validate check requirement needs to be removed, and then the new validate-cnames + validate-pr-template checks need to be added. I have access to do that 👍