Add some more detailed steps on reviewing
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 33
- Forks
- 19
- Avg merge
- 1d 22h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 30
Description
### What problem does your feature request solve?
The reviewing documentation could be improved.
### Describe the solution you'd like
Something like https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/rmed/wiki/dev/practices
Probably also want to link to the GitHub docs on making a review: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/reviewing-proposed-changes-in-a-pull-request
### Describe alternatives you've considered
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Research direction
Locate the existing reviewing documentation in CSET, then compare its coverage with the linked Met Office practices page and GitHub's reviewing-proposed-changes guide. Done means the documentation contains clear, detailed review steps and links to the relevant guidance.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100