Skip to content

Conversation

@pitrou
Copy link
Member

@pitrou pitrou commented Oct 23, 2025

Rationale for this change

This is to try to steer contributors into submitting more polished PRs.

@github-actions
Copy link

⚠️ GitHub issue #47899 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

@github-actions github-actions bot added awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review and removed awaiting review Awaiting review labels Oct 23, 2025
Comment on lines 28 to 30
**This PR includes breaking changes to public APIs.** (If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please explain which changes are breaking. If not, you can remove this.)

**This PR contains a "Critical Fix".** (If the changes fix either (a) a security vulnerability, (b) a bug that caused incorrect or invalid data to be produced, or (c) a bug that causes a crash (even when the API contract is upheld), please provide explanation. If not, you can remove this.)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you keep this in the "Are there any user-facing changes?" section?

@github-actions github-actions bot added awaiting changes Awaiting changes and removed awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review labels Oct 23, 2025
Copy link
Member

@amoeba amoeba left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 to other comments others have made, left one change.

I'm +1 to this since you and others do the majority of the PR review and triage.

### Checklist

- [ ] The PR's title follows existing conventions of the repository
- [ ] My code follows the general style and conventions of the codebase
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- [ ] My code follows the general style and conventions of the codebase
- [ ] My code follows the general style and conventions of the codebase ([C++](https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/cpp/development.html), [Python](https://arrow.apache.org/docs/developers/python/development.html))

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We don't have a good single reference for code style, but maybe linking directly to the C++ and Python development pages (which include style guidance) would be good? Generally, it'd be nice if as much of the contents of the PR template had links.

Copy link
Contributor

@zanmato1984 zanmato1984 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Other than the two existing claims should be above the checklists as kou pointed out, lgtm.

@github-actions github-actions bot added awaiting change review Awaiting change review and removed awaiting changes Awaiting changes labels Nov 17, 2025
@pitrou
Copy link
Member Author

pitrou commented Nov 17, 2025

I think I've addressed all review comments.

There is a question however: do we keep the checklist in the PR message when merging? Do we delete it?

@amoeba
Copy link
Member

amoeba commented Nov 18, 2025

Thanks @pitrou. I think it would be good to have the merge script remove the checklist on commit. The PR will always contain the checklist if we need to reference it for some reason later. Projects like brew and vcpkg don't include their checklist in the final commit.

@pitrou
Copy link
Member Author

pitrou commented Nov 18, 2025

I think it would be good to have the merge script remove the checklist on commit. The PR will always contain the checklist if we need to reference it for some reason later. Projects like brew and vcpkg don't include their checklist in the final commit.

Ok, I will try to do this in this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants