mirror of
https://github.com/zulip/zulip.git
synced 2025-11-02 04:53:36 +00:00
docs: Reformat review feedback section.
This mostly preserves the general shape of the text, but adds a bit of a bulleted checklist to help make it more skimmable.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -23,25 +23,34 @@ Lastly, ensuring the your PR passes CI and is organized into coherent
|
||||
commits would help save reviewers time, which could otherwise be used
|
||||
to dive right into reviewing the PR's core functionality.
|
||||
|
||||
### Guidelines for responding to a review feedback
|
||||
### Responding to a review feedback
|
||||
|
||||
Posting a note after you updated the PR is especially beneficial for folks like
|
||||
Tim, who manage their code review queue via GitHub notifications. Simply pushing
|
||||
an update without notifying about it on GitHub indicates to the reviewer the
|
||||
contributor hasn't yet resolved that feedback, and they might miss out on doing
|
||||
any follow-up reviews.
|
||||
Once you've received a review and resolved any feedback, it's critical
|
||||
to update the GitHub thread to reflect that. Best practices are to:
|
||||
|
||||
The best way to address feedback posted on your PR is to reply individually to
|
||||
the respective inline review comments. Adding a note in the comments on how
|
||||
you addressed the feedback helps the reviewers know what to look for in a
|
||||
follow-up review, much more than you posting a text saying "Updated!". Also,
|
||||
do communicate if you notice any potential issues when addressing feedback,
|
||||
rather than doing a suggested change blindly.
|
||||
* Make sure that CI passes and the PR is rebased onto recent master.
|
||||
* Post comments on each feedback thread explaining at least how you
|
||||
resolved the feedback, as well as any other useful information
|
||||
(problems encountered, reasoning for why you picked one of several
|
||||
options, a test you added to make sure the bug won't recur, etc.).
|
||||
* Mark any resolved threads as "resolved" in the GitHub UI, if
|
||||
appropriate.
|
||||
* Post a summary comment in the main feed for the PR, explaining that
|
||||
this is ready for another review, and summarizing any changes from
|
||||
the previous version, details on how you tested the changes, new
|
||||
screenshots/etc. More detail is better than less, as long as you
|
||||
take the time to write clearly.
|
||||
|
||||
If you think any suggestion left on the PR requires a more complex discussion, it
|
||||
can be helpful to have the discussion on a topic in the Zulip development community
|
||||
server. In case you do that, make sure to post a short comment on the GitHub PR
|
||||
linking to the conversation so they're findable from each other.
|
||||
If you resolve the feedback, but the PR has merge conflicts, CI
|
||||
failures, or the most recent comment is the reviewer asking you to fix
|
||||
something, it's very likely that a potential reviewer skimming your PR
|
||||
will assume it isn't ready for review and move on to other work.
|
||||
|
||||
If you need help or think an open discussion topic requires more
|
||||
feedback or a more complex discussion, move the discussion to a topic
|
||||
in the Zulip development community server. Be sure to provide links
|
||||
from the GitHub PR to the conversation (and vise versa) so that it's
|
||||
convenient to read both conversations together.
|
||||
|
||||
## Principles of code review
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user