[MRG+1] DOC: refactor issue and PR template#6470
Conversation
ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
| <!-- | ||
| If your issue is a usage question or does not potentially require | ||
| changes to the codebase to be solved, submit it here instead: | ||
| - StackOverflow with the [scikit-learn tag ](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/scikit-learn) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No need to use markdown for links in the template, especially in the guidelines (they can not be previewed).
|
@lesteve thanks for the review :) |
ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
| ) | ||
| model = lda_model.fit(lda_features) | ||
| ``` | ||
| If the code is long, feel free to put it in a ghostbin (https://ghostbin.com/) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
true, will edit. thanks!
|
Using HTML comments to prevent the instruction text from being rendered is a good idea! ;) |
CONTRIBUTING.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| - Please ensure all code snippets and error messages are formatted in | ||
| appropriate code blocks. | ||
| See ["Creating and highlighting code blocks"](https://help.github.com/articles/creating-and-highlighting-code-blocks). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You don't need the quotes inside the link.
|
this looks much better (though I haven't read the changes in detail). |
ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
| <!-- | ||
| If your issue is a usage question or does not potentially require | ||
| changes to the codebase to be solved, submit it here instead: | ||
| - StackOverflow with the scikit-learn tag (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/scikit-learn) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would remove the parentheses around the link, it increases the likelihood of the copying and pasting to go wrong.
|
@nelson-liu could you rebase on master, I think this should make Travis go green ? I think this PR is a clear improvement, so if you could spend some time finishing it off, it would be great ! |
nelson-liu
force-pushed
the
refactor_templates
branch
from
4c21243 to
af3b9b0
Compare
|
Hey @lesteve, thanks for the reminder, the current issue / pr template was getting to be a bit of an eyesore due to verbosity. Totally forgot that travis had blocked this from passing; I've since rebased, and it seems to pass the tests. Are there any more fixes that you would recommend to implement? Thanks for keeping an eye on this :) |
|
I'll try to take a closer look tomorrow but from what I remember it was looking like a nice improvement. We can always improve it incrementally in further PR if need be. |
|
gentle ping @lesteve / anyone else? I'm waiting for at least one lgtm before squashing. |
|
Hi, I know that my review doesn't count much. But it lgtm as a guide to newbies. Nice work @nelson-liu ! |
|
@maniteja123 thanks for taking a look, i appreciate it! :) |
nelson-liu
changed the title
nelson-liu
force-pushed
the
refactor_templates
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7b1c664 to
bd0a25f
Compare
|
Looks like a nice improvement, thanks! Note: +1 need to come from core developers. ping @rvraghav93, @amueller. |
|
Note: +1 need to come from core developers.
@lesteve: I think that if you give a +1 it counts.
|
|
Oops I didn't mean for it to be |
|
@maniteja123 not your fault, sorry for misunderstanding @lesteve . |
nelson-liu
changed the title
OK then I give my +1, @nelson-liu feel free to edit your title and add back the +1. |
nelson-liu
changed the title
ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| docs = ["Help I have a bug" for i in range(1000)] | ||
|
|
||
| vectorizer = CountVectorizer(input=docs,analyzer='word') |
|
This looks much better! Thanks! One more review and merge @TomDLT? |
nelson-liu
force-pushed
the
refactor_templates
branch
from
9463e80 to
9c6c5e6
Compare
|
LGTM too. Thanks @nelson-liu . |
|
thanks all! 🎉 |
8 participants
I've refactored the issue and PR template by moving some of the guidelines we had in there to CONTRIBUTING.md and adding headers to guide users toward supplying the needed information. I feel like this is less verbose and more functional, but I'm not sure whether putting everything into CONTRIBUTING.md was proper.
Thoughts on this new format? Remember that when users submit a PR or an issue, they see this raw output and unfortunately not the pretty preview. HTML comments do not render in the markdown of issues or PRs, which makes them ideal for inline examples and such.
There's some related discussion at #6394 about issue / pr templates in general, so try to save PR comments for suggestions specific to this pull request. General suggestions should go in the issue if at all possible.
Here are direct links to the raw and rendered versions:
raw PR template
rendered PR template
raw issue template
rendered issue template