|
| 1 | +## Goal |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +<!-- What is the intent of this change? |
| 4 | +e.g. "When initializing the Bugsnag client, it is currently difficult to (...) |
| 5 | + this change simplifies the process by (...)" |
| 6 | +
|
| 7 | + "Improves the performance of data filtering" |
| 8 | +
|
| 9 | + "Adds additional test coverage to multi-threaded use of Configuration |
| 10 | + objects" |
| 11 | +--> |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +<!-- For new features, include design documentation: |
| 14 | +
|
| 15 | +## Design |
| 16 | +
|
| 17 | +Why was this approach to the goal used? |
| 18 | +
|
| 19 | +--> |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +## Changeset |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +<!-- What structures or properties or functions were: |
| 24 | +
|
| 25 | +### Added |
| 26 | +
|
| 27 | +### Removed |
| 28 | +
|
| 29 | +### Changed |
| 30 | +
|
| 31 | +--> |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +## Tests |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +<!-- How was this change tested? What manual and automated tests were |
| 36 | + run/added? --> |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +## Discussion |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +### Alternative Approaches |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +<!-- What other approaches were considered or discussed? --> |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +### Outstanding Questions |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | +<!-- Are there any parts of the design or the implementation which seem |
| 47 | + less than ideal and that could require additional discussion? |
| 48 | + List here: --> |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +### Linked issues |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +<!-- |
| 53 | +
|
| 54 | +Fixes # |
| 55 | +Related to # |
| 56 | +
|
| 57 | +--> |
| 58 | + |
| 59 | +## Review |
| 60 | + |
| 61 | +<!-- When submitting for review, consider the points for self-review and the |
| 62 | + criteria which will be used for secondary review --> |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +For the submitter, initial self-review: |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +- [ ] Commented on code changes inline explain the reasoning behind the approach |
| 67 | +- [ ] Reviewed the test cases added for completeness and possible points for discussion |
| 68 | +- [ ] A changelog entry was added for the goal of this pull request |
| 69 | +- [ ] Check the scope of the changeset - is everything in the diff required for the pull request? |
| 70 | +- This pull request is ready for: |
| 71 | + - [ ] Initial review of the intended approach, not yet feature complete |
| 72 | + - [ ] Structural review of the classes, functions, and properties modified |
| 73 | + - [ ] Final review |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | +For the pull request reviewer(s), this changeset has been reviewed for: |
| 76 | + |
| 77 | +- [ ] Consistency across platforms for structures or concepts added or modified |
| 78 | +- [ ] Consistency between the changeset and the goal stated above |
| 79 | +- [ ] Internal consistency with the rest of the library - is there any overlap between existing interfaces and any which have been added? |
| 80 | +- [ ] Usage friction - is the proposed change in usage cumbersome or complicated? |
| 81 | +- [ ] Performance and complexity - are there any cases of unexpected O(n^3) when iterating, recursing, flat mapping, etc? |
| 82 | +- [ ] Concurrency concerns - if components are accessed asynchronously, what issues will arise |
| 83 | +- [ ] Thoroughness of added tests and any missing edge cases |
| 84 | +- [ ] Idiomatic use of the language |
0 commit comments