Add issue forms and PR template - #38
Open
dwelch2344 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Two YAML issue forms (bug report, feature request) and a PR template under .github/. Forms use render: json for the record and Diagnostics output so reproductions come in fenced. PR checklist covers only the npm scripts that exist today: typecheck, build, test:local. Refs CVEProject#21 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Author
New Issue
Bug Report
Feature Request
PR raw
PR preview
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Took a pass at #21 (issue and PR templates). Three files, all under
.github/:ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.ymlISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.ymlPULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.mdA few notes on the choices:
YAML issue forms instead of legacy Markdown. cve-services and cve-core both
use the old
.mdstyle, but forms let us mark the record and theDiagnosticsoutput as
render: json, so they come in fenced and readable instead ofdepending on the filer to do it. Library version and Node version are required
fields for the same reason. The cve-services templates also carry leftover
(TBD)placeholders and ask for a Postman file, which doesn't mean anything fora library, so copying them wasn't worth it.
One bug form, not two. "This record validates incorrectly" and "the library
crashed" want the same fields, so there's a dropdown at the top instead of a
second template. It also makes false-positive vs false-negative explicit at
triage.
PR checklist only covers
typecheck,build, andtest:local, since thoseare the only scripts that exist today. Nothing about lint or CI until Add continuous integration workflow #26 lands.
"Validation impact" is the one non-obvious PR section. Changing what the
library accepts or rejects changes what CNAs can publish, so an explicit "None"
beats leaving it implied.
Deliberately skipped:
config.ymlrouting, a user story template (verycve-services shaped), and CONTRIBUTING/SECURITY/CODE_OF_CONDUCT. Blank issues
stay enabled — at ~19 open issues we don't need the funnel yet.
schema-level and policy-level requests elsewhere without any routing config.
One open question:
cve-servicesandcve-coreboth keepPULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.mdat the repo root. I put ours in
.github/since this repo had no.github/atall. Happy to move it if we'd rather match, though standardizing across the org
is probably a
.githubdefault-repo conversation worth having.Will put screenshots in comments in a sec...