Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Convert markdown issue templates into issue forms #73751

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 3, 2021
Merged

Convert markdown issue templates into issue forms #73751

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 3, 2021

Conversation

webknjaz
Copy link
Member

@webknjaz webknjaz commented Mar 1, 2021 •
edited
Loading

SUMMARY

This change makes the submitted GitHub issue structure predictable.

👉 ISSUE FORMS FROM THIS PR IN THE DEMO REPOSITORY 👈

UPD: @mkrizek verified that ansibull is capable of digesting issues created with these forms.

ISSUE TYPE
  • Maintenance Pull Request
COMPONENT NAME

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/*

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

https://gh-community.github.io/issue-template-feedback/structured/

@ansibot ansibot added affects_2.11 core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. needs_triage Needs a first human triage before being processed. support:core This issue/PR relates to code supported by the Ansible Engineering Team. labels Mar 1, 2021
mattclay
mattclay previously requested changes Mar 2, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@mattclay mattclay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should probably experiment with this in a separate repo so everyone can see how it will work. That will make it easier to comment on and decide if this is something we want.

Also, the checkboxes should be omitted. They aren't part of the original templates.

@mattclay mattclay removed the needs_triage Needs a first human triage before being processed. label Mar 2, 2021
@ansibot ansibot added needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. and removed core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. labels Mar 2, 2021
@webknjaz webknjaz force-pushed the maintenance/issue-forms branch from 65f4344 to 7a318ee Compare March 2, 2021 15:36
@ansibot ansibot added core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. and removed needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. labels Mar 2, 2021
@webknjaz webknjaz force-pushed the maintenance/issue-forms branch from 7a318ee to c6a6d57 Compare March 2, 2021 16:08
@ansibot ansibot added core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. and removed needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. labels Mar 2, 2021
@webknjaz webknjaz force-pushed the maintenance/issue-forms branch from c6a6d57 to e510489 Compare March 2, 2021 16:12
webknjaz
webknjaz commented Mar 2, 2021
View reviewed changes
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/documentation_report.yml Outdated
Comment on lines 105 to 114
- type: checkboxes
attributes:
label: Code of Conduct
description: |
Read the [Ansible Code of Conduct][CoC] first.

[CoC]: https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/community/code_of_conduct.html?utm_medium=github&utm_source=issue_form--documentation_report.yml
options:
- label: I agree to follow the Ansible Code of Conduct
required: true
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mattclay are you talking about this ☝️? Would it be better to add it in a separate PR or are you opposed to the idea in general?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it's not part of the current templates.

I wouldn't open a separate PR to add it either. The issue templates should contain the minimum text and prompts necessary to facilitate reporting issues. We should review them periodically to see if there is anything we can remove or clarify to encourage better issue reporting. For example:

  • The documentation issue probably doesn't need the "OS / Environment" section. I believe @bcoca already mentioned this elsewhere.
  • With the way these templates work, the "Additional Information" section is redundant with the comment section that immediately follows.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • With the way these templates work, the "Additional Information" section is redundant with the comment section that immediately follows.

WSYWIG is only enabled for one form, for screenshots. It's non-enforceable.

I wouldn't open a separate PR to add it either.

I checked with @gundalow if it's a good idea to have the CoC check and he thinks it is.

gundalow
gundalow reviewed Mar 2, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@gundalow gundalow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for doing this.

@webknjaz @gundalow
Title-case the form field labels
c26d631 
Co-authored-by: John R Barker <john@johnrbarker.com>
@webknjaz
Copy link
Member Author

webknjaz commented Mar 2, 2021

@mattclay I've made a demo in a separate repo as you suggested: /~https://github.com/ansible/issue-forms-demo-for-ansible/issues/new/choose

@webknjaz webknjaz requested a review from bcoca March 2, 2021 16:31
@webknjaz webknjaz requested a review from jimi-c March 2, 2021 16:35
@ansibot ansibot added needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. and removed core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. labels Mar 2, 2021
@webknjaz webknjaz dismissed mattclay’s stale review March 3, 2021 11:15

Removed CoC checkboxes for now

@webknjaz webknjaz requested review from mattclay and gundalow March 3, 2021 11:17
@ansibot ansibot added core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. and removed needs_revision This PR fails CI tests or a maintainer has requested a review/revision of the PR. labels Mar 3, 2021
gundalow
gundalow approved these changes Mar 3, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@gundalow gundalow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is great, thank you for doing it.

@gundalow gundalow merged commit fca85db into ansible:devel Mar 3, 2021
@webknjaz webknjaz mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2021
Merged
@moreati moreati mentioned this pull request Mar 9, 2021
Closed
@ansible ansible locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 31, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@gundalow gundalow gundalow approved these changes

@acozine acozine Awaiting requested review from acozine

@mkrizek mkrizek Awaiting requested review from mkrizek

@nitzmahone nitzmahone Awaiting requested review from nitzmahone

@sivel sivel Awaiting requested review from sivel

@bcoca bcoca Awaiting requested review from bcoca

@jimi-c jimi-c Awaiting requested review from jimi-c

@mattclay mattclay Awaiting requested review from mattclay

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
affects_2.11 core_review In order to be merged, this PR must follow the core review workflow. support:core This issue/PR relates to code supported by the Ansible Engineering Team.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@webknjaz @mattclay @gundalow @ansibot