NETOBSERV-1222: Pull request template #400
Conversation
|
@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1222 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #400 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 53.67% 53.69% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 44 44
Lines 5559 5596 +37
==========================================
+ Hits 2984 3005 +21
- Misses 2359 2375 +16
Partials 216 216
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Co-authored-by: Sara Thomas <sarthoma@redhat.com>
jotak
requested review from
msherif1234,
OlivierCazade,
jpinsonneau,
memodi and
Amoghrd
| * [ ] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix _(in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes)._ | ||
| * [ ] Does this PR require product documentation? | ||
| * [ ] If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs. | ||
| * [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry? | ||
| * [ ] If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA. | ||
| * [ ] Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc. | ||
| * [ ] If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket. | ||
| * QE requirements (check 1 from the list): | ||
| * [ ] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise. | ||
| * [ ] Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change). | ||
| * [ ] No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would split more each step especially for a checklist exposed to external contributors.
| * [ ] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix _(in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes)._ | |
| * [ ] Does this PR require product documentation? | |
| * [ ] If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs. | |
| * [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry? | |
| * [ ] If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA. | |
| * [ ] Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc. | |
| * [ ] If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket. | |
| * QE requirements (check 1 from the list): | |
| * [ ] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise. | |
| * [ ] Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change). | |
| * [ ] No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team). | |
| * [ ] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? | |
| If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix _(in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes)._ | |
| * [ ] PR title prefixed | |
| * [ ] Has user facing changes | |
| * [ ] Does this PR require product documentation? | |
| If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. | |
| Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs. | |
| * [ ] Label "documentation" has been added | |
| * [ ] Description is ready for docs | |
| * [ ] Configuration steps are documented | |
| * [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry? | |
| If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA. | |
| * [ ] Release note text has been added | |
| * Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? | |
| E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc. | |
| * [ ] Additionnal testing info described in the JIRA ticket | |
| * QE requirements (check 1 from the list): | |
| * [ ] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise | |
| * [ ] Regression tests only | |
| (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change) | |
| * [ ] No QE | |
| (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team) |
It's more wordy but ensure each item is done. WDYT ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm could we first give a try with the less detailed one, and add items just if we feel the need? (It's just that ... I don't want to have the feeling to complete an annual tax form for every PR 😵💫 😁)
|
I'm merging it but I'm 100% ok to add more to this list as Julien suggested when we find something is lacking (to be discussed/agreed with docs & qe) |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jotak The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/ok-to-test |
PR template.
Here's how it looks like during creation:
Once it's created:
