-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add PR templates for atmospheric_physics #115
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
deb114e
c63386f
0ce6e39
18a0ff3
ed5fcb9
cdd09d2
f0e9da0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | ||
Originator(s): | ||
|
||
Description (include issue title and the keyword ['closes', 'fixes', 'resolves'] and issue number): | ||
|
||
List all namelist files that were added or changed: | ||
|
||
List all files eliminated and why: | ||
|
||
List all files added and what they do: | ||
|
||
List all existing files that have been modified, and describe the changes: | ||
(Helpful git command: `git diff --name-status development...<your_branch_name>`) | ||
|
||
cacraigucar marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
List any test failures: | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Perhaps specify what tests we expect to be run: Are there other tests we currently expect developers to run? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. not exactly sure what to do here. there aren't any tests that are required to be run for atmospheric_physics PRs. i guess i could do @nusbaume @jimmielin thoughts? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think when I went through my ZM PR, Jesse said this would be the automated github tests. So, perhaps this just need to be There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. hmmm. i guess so? i feel like the odds of us force pushing a PR that has failing automated tests seems small though. |
||
|
||
Is this an answer-changing PR? If so, is it a new physics package, algorithm change, tuning change, etc? | ||
|
||
If yes to the above question, list how this code was validated with the new/modified features? |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ | ||
Tag name (The PR title should also include the tag name): | ||
Originator(s): | ||
|
||
List all `develop` PR numbers included in this PR and the title of each: | ||
|
||
List all test failures: |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | ||
Please go the the `Preview` tab and select the appropriate PR template: | ||
|
||
* [development branch](?expand=1&template=develop-template.md) | ||
* [main branch](?expand=1&template=main-template.md) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps add a bullet like:
Purpose of PR (new scheme, modification to existing scheme, bug fix to scheme, etc.)
. This might be unnecessary if the PR title covers this, but if it doesn't, perhaps this information would be useful?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For this section (summary and purpose), would it make sense to follow a layout similar to a few other open sourced projects (ex. dotnet/aspnetcore#55968), where we have
Summary
,Description
and then a section for fixes/resolutions, followed by the other sections below?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also, I think we can remove the summary line in general because the top line in the commit message will be the PR title (as seen from my last PR into the develop branch):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would suggest the Summary should be amended to say
(include Issue title and the keyword ['closes', 'fixes', 'resolves'] and issue number)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've used @cacraigucar 's modified language. And changed from "summary" to "description". does that work? I feel like we're deep in semantics...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mwaxmonsky - Yes, the PR title will be already displayed. The PR will be closing one or more issues, and those need to be listed in the PR template, which is what this section is asking for. Sometimes the PR title doesn't cover all the issues which are being brought in in one PR.