Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replacing markdown issue templates with yml forms #748

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Nov 3, 2022

Conversation

jarmak-nv
Copy link
Contributor

@jarmak-nv jarmak-nv commented Oct 21, 2022

Description

This PR replaces the existing markdown issue templates with form-based YML templates. They provide a more interactive experience and can require certain fields be filled out prior to issue submission.

Checklist

  • I am familiar with the Contributing Guidelines.
  • New or existing tests cover these changes.
  • The documentation is up to date with these changes.

@jarmak-nv jarmak-nv added 3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team feature request New feature or request non-breaking Non-breaking change labels Oct 21, 2022
@jarmak-nv jarmak-nv requested a review from a team as a code owner October 21, 2022 14:20
@jarmak-nv
Copy link
Contributor Author

To see the forms in action and try them out to see what changes you may want, you can view the templates by creating issues in the feature branch:

https://github.com/jarmak-nv/cuspatial/issues/new/choose

Copy link
Member

@harrism harrism left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this. I think there are some opportunities to streamline.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/submit_question.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/submit_question.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jarmak-nv
Copy link
Contributor Author

@harrism I've added a new yml - documentation_request.yml as a possible single replacement for both of the previous doc forms. If looks good, will delete the old doc forms.

Copy link
Member

@harrism harrism left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a couple more suggestions for clarity, then I approve. Would be good to get one more review.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/documentation_request.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/documentation_request.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 32 to 35
- Critical (currently preventing usage)
- High
- Medium
- Low (would be nice)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess I prefer two options high and low, mostly just because of decision-making pressure when working through these forms.

@jarmak-nv
Copy link
Contributor Author

All changes incorporated aside from Thomson's good idea for the print_env.sh

Once we have that resolved, this should be good to go.

@harrism
Copy link
Member

harrism commented Nov 2, 2022

Can we just create an issue for print_env.sh and then get this merged independent of it?

@jarmak-nv
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'll make the issue for it now, and will request an ops review for merge.

@jarmak-nv jarmak-nv removed the 3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team label Nov 3, 2022
@jarmak-nv jarmak-nv added the 5 - Ready to Merge Testing and reviews complete, ready to merge label Nov 3, 2022
@thomcom
Copy link
Contributor

thomcom commented Nov 3, 2022

@gpucibot merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 1f17152 into rapidsai:branch-22.12 Nov 3, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
5 - Ready to Merge Testing and reviews complete, ready to merge feature request New feature or request non-breaking Non-breaking change
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants