MR template text

[Julian Leviston]

I gave it a shot at your behest, but I find your writing far more eloquent than mine, so it could no doubt deal with some editing.


This is a work in progress Merge Request!
 
If you want (a) to get code reviews from others, or
            (b) to land the patch in GHC,
please do follow these guidelines.

* [ ] (you can do this last) please replace this entire notice and checklist template with the following:
  - a description of what the Merge Request does. For single-commit MRs, the commit message is often perfect
  - A reference (e.g. #19415) to the ticket that led to this MR, and that describes the
  problem that this MR solves.  Almost all MRs need a ticket, except the tiniest
  changes (e.g. code formatting)
    - A ticket describes a *problem*
    - A merge request describes a *solution* to that problem.
* [ ] commits need to be either individually buildable or squashed
* [ ] commits need to have commit messages which describe *what they do*
   (referring to [Notes][notes] and tickets using `#NNNN` syntax when
   appropriate)
* [ ] add source comments describing your change. For larger changes you
   likely should add a [Note][notes] and cross-reference it from the relevant
   places.
* [ ] add a [testcase to the
   testsuite](https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/building/running-tests/adding).
 
If you have any questions don't hesitate to open your merge request and inquire
in a comment. If your patch isn't quite done yet please do add a `WIP:` prefix to
your MR title.
 
[notes]: For general style guidance and information on notes see
https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/commentary/coding-style



> On 24 Feb 2021, at 9:16 am, Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Julian
>  
> I am by definition the wrong person to judge (or even write) text like this. 
>  
> Could you possibly have a go at editing the draft I sent so that you think it has the right tone and content?  The current one is not working well.  Your draft will almost certainly be better than mine.
>  
> Simon
>  
> From: Julian Leviston <julian at leviston.net> 
> Sent: 23 February 2021 21:59
> To: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>
> Cc: ghc-devs <ghc-devs at haskell.org>
> Subject: Re: MR template text
>  
>  
> Hi Simon, list et al,
>  
> I’ve only contributed a couple of times, but I personally found the checklist invaluable to guide me (and remind me of) what needed to be done in total. In addition, giving folks a checklist that they can actually check off gives us a common set of agreed upon things that’s needed in an MR right in the MR, which is nice to folks.
>  
> I wonder if we could reword it to say it’s still a work in progress or words to that effect at the top, and make the system not allow MRs to be built and/or merged unless they edit that text away, as well as have a bot inform them of why this is? :) I like the idea of the system guiding us through the process.
>  
> Regards,
> Julian
>  
> Would it be possible to get our tooling (a bot?) to nudge us if we haven’t changed it?
>  
> On 24 Feb 2021, at 3:14 am, Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs <ghc-devs at haskell.org <mailto:ghc-devs at haskell.org>> wrote:
>  
> I often see MRs in my inbox that say
> 
> Thank you for your contribution to GHC!
> Please take a few moments to verify that your commits fulfill the following:
> [ ] are either individually buildable or squashed
>  
> 
> This is because the author hasn’t changed the Description of the MR, but rather has left the template text unchanged.
> 
> As a way to “nudge” authors to give reviewers more information, I suggest replacing the template text with the draft below.  Does anyone have any views, for or against?
> 
> Simon
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20210224/46b98362/attachment-0001.html>