Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flink.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAdrtT209mVa=mP7Az42xdeS0MavvyRR9NVtYDQO44rSuntpdQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANC1h_tjO_EedU3waxE89-vY0W2m6=acFBKsiC33YjgNuQ1kdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKiyyaETfgqmwWRA9wL0A9nehnJJiWVFwRoDzr9+Yf4hdh496g@mail.gmail.com>
 <etPan.596dc163.1ccb315.dfb@apache.org> <CAAdrtT209mVa=mP7Az42xdeS0MavvyRR9NVtYDQO44rSuntpdQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:15:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKiyyaGQgiJcpGW542z3xWvXGZ-3FwKvzPHGMPSSGrU=O5Vzrg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] A more thorough Pull Request check list and template
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
archived-at: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:16:30 -0000

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhueske@gmail.com> wrote:
> For example even if the question about changed dependencies is answered
> with "no", the reviewer still has to check that.

But having it as a required option/text in the PR descriptions helps
reviewers to actually remember to check that. I think we should be
more realistic here and assume that reviewers will also overlook
things etc.

To me, keeping the questions is more important than the intro text.
Therefore, I would be OK with moving the text to the contrib guide,
but I would definitely keep the detailed yes/nos and not go with high
level questions that everyone will answer differently.

=E2=80=93 Ufuk