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.

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

nonspec: Make requirements for draft reviews more explicit #1201

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 24, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 6 additions & 2 deletions CONTRIBUTING.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -138,8 +138,12 @@ always requires one reviewer, even if the author has write access.

Note 2: If the PR only touches files in the [Draft](docs/spec-stages.md)
specification stage, then the "waiting period" and "# reviewers" are relaxed and
up to Maintainer discretion. Files in the Draft stage have a large banner at the
top of each rendered page, as well as the text "Status: Draft".
up to Maintainer discretion (including the PR author if they're a maintainer). Note
that a relaxed number of reviewers and waiting period may result in more back
and forth with the expanded set of reviewers as drafts are finalized.
Drafts should be indicated in the PR title following a pattern of `<type>: draft: <subject>`.
Files in the Draft stage have a large banner at the top of each rendered page,
as well as the text "Status: Draft".

[squash and merge]: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/incorporating-changes-from-a-pull-request/about-pull-request-merges#squash-and-merge-your-commits

Expand Down