This template is designed as a list of examples, questions and/or prompts for teams to discuss as they build norms around using GitHub.
We prefer a directory layout that looks like:
- README.md
- CONTRIBUTING.md
- LICENSE
- (continue here)
For our project, we prefer that pull requests originate from (edit to choose one) [forks of the main repo] [branches within the main repo].
When creating branches within a shared repo, our naming conventions look like:
ticketnumber-myinitials-feature-name
When we create new Pull Requests, we have the following conventions.
Works in progress can be prefixed with [WIP] in the PR title. We encourage openness and transparency so developers should feel free to create PRs early in the development process and prepend the [WIP] prefix to indicate the the PR code is not yet ready for review.
New PRs should be assigned to the person who opens the PR.
Once a PR is ready for review, Reviewers can be assigned based on familiarity with the feature space and/or availability.
Reviewing each other's code is one of the most important collaborative efforts that development teams tackle and can come to define the daily culture of our work. Some common expectations should include:
- who performs the review
- how much time should a review take
- how quickly do we expect a response to our request for a code review
Many other question prompts are available.
Does the team use the GH issues feature?
- tags?
- milestones?
- templates?
Does the team use the GH wiki? What conventions do we follow?
- Who are the administrators?
- How are administrative changes decided and communicated?
We use [these linting tools] with [this config].