add PR template for new SPECs #393
Conversation
|
Ohh, it's too bad that unlike issues, we cannot template different types of PRs. Maybe then just a link to a docs page and template? Or a bot comment with the checklist on any PRs that adds a new spec file/directory? (Though that will be just as after the fact as us commenting) |
|
OK, so I tried "the fancy way" and it seems to work:
To get the proof-of-concept I had to merge this PR's changes into EDIT: here's the URL if you want to fiddle with the UX: https://github.com/drammock/specs/compare/main...drammock:specs:bar?expand=1 |
| @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | |||
| If you are opening this PR to propose a new SPEC, please go to the `Preview` tab, | |||
| then [click here for the new SPEC templatee](?expand=1&template=new_spec.md). | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If folks do like it, we should fix this typo before merging:
| then [click here for the new SPEC templatee](?expand=1&template=new_spec.md). | |
| then [click here for the new SPEC template](?expand=1&template=new_spec.md). |
|
FWIW having a template is nice. Thanks! |
@jarrodmillman proposed this idea at the Summit and I volunteered to implement.
However, I'm actually not sure it's a good idea to merge this, because:The template's current location and filenameLocating the template at.github/pull_request_template.mdshould mean that it shows up on every new PR; however, this repo gets PRs other than new SPEC proposals (e.g., to update draft SPECs, add project endorsements, etc), and the new-SPEC-specific PR template won't be relevant for those.?template=propose_a_new_spec.md. (They also require storing the templates in.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE/, and if one does so, new PRs opened through the UI will not use any template at all.)It might be possible to hack a solution by making a default template at
.github/pull_request_template.mdthat includes relative links to the various templates using URL query parameters (example here), but that feels a bit brittle / over-engineered. LMK if there's appetite for that approach though, and I can give it a shot. EDIT: I've now implemented this approach, see below.Other note: while Issue templates can be defined in YAML files and include built-in validation, PR templates cannot. Validation would have to use a GH Action (example here).