211fee9c43
Remove elements of the PR template that have a low signal/noise ratio, and add one that I think would have a good signal/noise ratio. ----- Remove: Determined the impact on package closure size (by running `nix path-info -S` before and after) ----- Rationale: This is rarely done in practice, and apart from for specific packages this is usually not a good indicator of anything useful It might make sense to re-introduce it with two holes to fill, but then we would have to make a serious decision to never land without these two numbers filled in or with too big a regression, because in practice this box has been a no-op in many cases. Maybe just integrating this check in nixpkgs-review would bring the most benefit here? ----- ----- Remove: Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date ----- Rationale: This is fuzzy, “relevant documentation” is way too often hard to find ----- ----- Add: Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking ----- Rationale: This is way too often forgotten, and is also a self-contained easy task ----- |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| ISSUE_TEMPLATE | ||
| workflows | ||
| CODEOWNERS | ||
| CONTRIBUTING.md | ||
| ISSUE_TEMPLATE.md | ||
| labeler.yml | ||
| PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md | ||
| STALE-BOT.md | ||
| stale.yml | ||