Improve the "Making Good PRs" section
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Forks
- 1k
- Avg merge
- 2d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 12
Description
I often see PRs with misleading or vague titles. This is problematic, as the PR titles often end up being the commit titles, and commit titles are one of the most important tools we have when searching for historic changes. Bad titles impact maintainability.
Suggested edits:
- Enforce a strict title format
- Promote writing accurate and concise PR titles/descriptions
Perhaps the "Making Good PRs" section can be further promoted. Would it make sense to extract it and move it a level up in the doc hierarchy?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the "Making Good PRs" section in the developer guide and reviewing the surrounding documentation hierarchy. Decide how the section should address accurate, concise pull request titles and descriptions, and whether it belongs at a higher level. Done means the guidance and placement clearly reflect the issue's suggested improvements.
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