docs: add standard pull request review checklist #79
Conversation
WalkthroughA new file has been added to the tech-standards directory. The file, 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 (
|
osm-Jatin
changed the title
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
tech-standards/standard_PR_review_checklist.md (2)
1-67: Consider Emphasizing Flexibility Over Over-Prescription.
While the checklist is comprehensive, be mindful of the balance between providing detailed guidance and keeping the process flexible. Consider summarizing or marking certain elements as optional to avoid overwhelming contributors.
67-67: Additional Resource Links Suggestion.
Optionally, consider adding a small section at the bottom with links to your project’s coding standards or contribution guidelines to provide additional context for reviewers.
📜 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)
📓 Common learnings
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 (8)
tech-standards/standard_PR_review_checklist.md (8)
1-2: Header Clarity Confirmed.
The title “Standard PR Review Checklist” immediately communicates the purpose of the document.
3-13: PR Meta Information Section is Well-Structured.
This section clearly outlines expectations such as having a clear title, detailed description, reviewer assignment, and optional labels. The points are concise and help set the context for the review process.
14-24: Code Changes Section Provides Clear Guidance.
The checklist effectively emphasizes maintaining a single scope of changes, following coding standards, and avoiding repetition and hardcoded values. This helps ensure that PRs remain focused and clean.
25-35: Quality and Best Practices Section is Comprehensive.
The inclusion of guidelines for tests, linting, error handling, and performance considerations ensures that the code quality meets the project’s standards. This section is both thorough and actionable.
36-45: Compliance Section is Adequately Addressed.
The checklist covers critical areas like CI/CD pipeline validation, security, and backward compatibility. This helps in preventing regressions and ensures adherence to security standards.
46-52: Documentation and UI Section Offers Good Direction.
Providing guidelines on updating relevant documentation and including visual evidence for UI changes ensures that any alterations are well-documented and align with design requirements.
53-60: Miscellaneous Section Ensures Cleanup and Dependency Checks.
The focus on removing dead code, eliminating debugging artifacts, and reviewing dependencies is essential for maintaining a clean codebase. This section is concise and practical.
61-67: Final Checks Section is Clear and Actionable.
Requiring a self-review, cross-environment testing, and using feature flags (where applicable) provides a solid final step before merging. This reinforces overall quality assurance.
Description
Why is this needed?
Summary by CodeRabbit