Document development and PR review workflows#77
Conversation
| ### 2. Review the Code Changes | ||
| Code changes should be reviewed for correctness, readability, consistency, and | ||
| scope. Much of the review process is subjective, so this document will only aim | ||
| to provide guidance for things to look for, rather than a rubric for evaluation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a suggestion, but we could look at codifying this section into a standardized Agent Skill that could be added to each repo and run by the reviewer as a secondary "AI check" on the PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree; we also have #76 which is essentially contributing what could be an Agent Skill. I've made myself a note and will find the right place to document this task
NeonCharlie-24
left a comment
NeonCharlie-24
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This all looks good to me! Left two comments on areas I've had trouble with that may benefit from a bit more elaboration.
Unrelated to any changes that need to be made to these documents, I also left a suggestion about potentially adding a standardized Agent Skill to our PR review process.
2 participants
Description
Adds
Standard Development Workflowdocument to describe best practices around branch naming, PR management, and rebase operationsAdds
Reviewing a Pull Requestdocument to outline the PR review process and considerationsIssues
Other Notes
Open to feedback if this can be better documented or clarified