docs: add pull request review checklist #76
Conversation
WalkthroughA new Pull Request (PR) review checklist has been introduced in the Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
tech-standards/standared-PR-review-checklist.md (2)
3-12: Enhance PR Meta Information section with examplesConsider adding:
- Recommended length for PR descriptions (e.g., 2-3 paragraphs)
- Example of a well-written PR description
- Template for structuring the description
This will help standardize PR submissions across the team.
61-65: Add pre-submission checklist to Final ChecksConsider adding a pre-submission checklist that includes:
- Rebase check (is the branch up to date?)
- Conflict resolution verification
- Local build and test success
- Environment-specific configuration review
- Common pitfalls to verify
- Performance impact verification
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md (3)
3-12: Consider adding guidelines for PR size and draft status.The PR Meta Information section is well-structured. Consider adding:
- Guidelines for maximum PR size (e.g., number of files/lines changed)
- When to use draft PRs for work in progress
## PR Meta Information - **PR Title**: Ensure the PR title is clear, concise, and adheres to the project's naming standards (e.g., `[Feature] Add X`, `[Bugfix] Fix Y`, `[Refactor] Z`). +- **PR Size**: Keep PRs focused and manageable: + - Aim for less than 500 lines of changes + - Consider breaking larger changes into smaller, logical PRs +- **Draft Status**: Use draft PRs when: + - Work is still in progress + - Early feedback is needed + - Changes are not ready for final review - **Description**: Include a detailed description explaining:
14-24: Add version control best practices.The Code Changes section would benefit from including:
- Commit message guidelines
- Branch naming conventions
- Code review granularity recommendations
## Code Changes +- **Version Control**: + - Follow commit message format: `<type>(<scope>): <description>` (e.g., `feat(auth): add login validation`) + - Use descriptive branch names (e.g., `feature/login-validation`, `bugfix/memory-leak`) + - Keep commits atomic and focused on single logical changes - **Scope of Changes**:
53-60: Add guidelines for code organization and configuration management.Consider adding sections for:
- Code organization standards
- Configuration management
- Environment variables handling
## Miscellaneous +- **Code Organization**: + - Follow project's folder structure + - Place new files in appropriate directories + - Maintain separation of concerns +- **Configuration Management**: + - Review configuration changes + - Update environment variable documentation + - Verify configuration defaults - **Dead Code**: Remove any unused code, variables, or imports.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md (2)
5-5: Consider standardizing the PR title format further.The current format
[Feature] Add Xcould be enhanced to include the scope/component affected.-[Feature] Add X +[Feature][Component] Add X
25-25: Fix markdown indentation.The line about hardcoded values appears to be incorrectly indented, breaking the list structure.
-- **No Hardcoded Values**: Replace hardcoded values with constants, environment variables, or configurations. +- **No Hardcoded Values**: Replace hardcoded values with constants, environment variables, or configurations.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Learnings (1)
tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md (1)
Learnt from: Jatin-1602
PR: OsmosysSoftware/dev-standards#76
File: tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md:0-0
Timestamp: 2025-01-23T04:14:09.067Z
Learning: Keep checklists and guidelines concise and flexible rather than overly detailed and prescriptive, especially for general standards documents.
🔇 Additional comments (6)
tech-standards/standard-PR-review-checklist.md (6)
31-34: LGTM! Clear and well-referenced commit message guidelines.The section effectively combines specific examples with links to detailed standards.
38-50: Well-structured quality checks with appropriate level of detail.The section effectively covers essential aspects without being overly prescriptive.
54-60: Good coverage of essential compliance checks.The section effectively covers critical aspects while maintaining simplicity.
64-67: Appropriate level of documentation and UI guidelines.The section maintains a good balance between mandatory and optional requirements.
71-77: Comprehensive coverage of often-overlooked aspects.Good emphasis on dependency management and code cleanliness.
81-83: Appropriate final verification steps.The section effectively covers essential final checks while keeping optional items flexible.
Jatin-1602
changed the title
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation