Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Mark PRs as invalid which have no description #103

Closed
alexellis opened this issue Nov 10, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #104
Closed

Mark PRs as invalid which have no description #103

alexellis opened this issue Nov 10, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #104

Comments

@alexellis
Copy link
Owner

alexellis commented Nov 10, 2018

Expected Behaviour

Mark PRs as invalid which have no description (body) at all.

  • Unit tests will be required.
  • This needs to be an optional flag as a feature so that people can turn it off / opt-out.

Non-goal: analysing templates to see if they are filled in or not. That is handled via #40

Current Behaviour

Maintainers have to step in to comment and ask for details of the change which is really quite frustrating especially when there is a contribution guide.

@burtonr
Copy link
Contributor

burtonr commented Nov 10, 2018

I'll look in to this.

It will be a bit more involved than just if len(pr.Body) < 1 since there can be Pull Request templates that have some amount of text filled in automatically.

Thinking out loud, may need to take the PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md and compare it to the created PR to find if the user has put any additional text.

Should there be a minimum length of the description that needs to be added? Without some sort of limit, it would be possible to submit a PR with Done in it...

@alexellis
Copy link
Owner Author

The scope of this PR is only for blank PRs. There is a separate issue which is blocked due to complexity about template analysis.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants