Skip to content

PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
42 lines (29 loc) · 2.21 KB

PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

File metadata and controls

42 lines (29 loc) · 2.21 KB

JIRA issue: https://jira.plos.org/jira/browse/-

Related PRs:

molten, plos-formulas, other applications

What this PR does:

Explain in a few sentences what functionality changed, and how you approached those changes. Don't be afraid to give a little extra detail. The Reviewer is going to read the original ticket, but this can point them in the right direction.

Developer Notes

Anything that was particularly difficult, or interesting, or made you nervous, and should get particular attention during the review?

Code Author Tasks:

This list should be finished before code review, mark as N/A tasks that don't apply to your PR:

  • Ticket AC is updated with any decisions made in comments or side conversations.
  • Testing or PO Accept notes that will assist the tester, Product Owner or reviewer are set in the ticket.
  • All PRs are created and linked for work I have done against other projects as part of this ticket.
  • Intergration Tests have been addressed. QA has been notified of the feature and a ticket has been created for that work, or integration tests have been updated.
  • There are unit tests sufficient for both positive and negative test cases, test coverage has not decreased as part of this work.
  • Any necessary documentation in confluence or READMEs is updated.

If I used outside libraries:

  • Confirmed unique - we aren't using something similar elsewhere
  • License comports with our licensing (MIT preferable)

If I modified any environment variables:

  • Pull requests are created to change the files in molten or in SALT-formulas.

If I made any database changes:

  • DB migration scripts are created and this detail is added to testing notes in the ticket.

Code Review Tasks

  • I read through the JIRA ticket's AC before doing the rest of the review.
  • I ran the code (in the review environment or locally). I agree the running code fulfills the Acceptance Criteria as stated on the JIRA ticket. If not practical I have seen some evidence that the code does what it says (tests have passed).
  • The code adheres to the values and guidelines of the project. (link here)
  • Security vulnerabilities have been addressed.

Project or Language Specific Tasks