Expand the MR Default template with some clarifications
What does this MR do?
This was motivated from this internal discussion.
Expand the MR Default template
- Makes it clearer the expectations regarding which manual jobs need to
be executed when preparing the MR for review.
- Makes it clearer what is the expectation regarding the GitLab.com
pipeline. By reading GitLab.com, I thought we had to do some testing related to the gitlab-org/gitlab project, which already happens when
we trigger QA testing from this very own repo.
- Makes it clearer which jobs need to be triggered by team members. In case of community contributors, this need to be done by reviewers.
Author's checklist
-
Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course -
Follow the: -
When ready for review, MR is labeled "~workflow::ready for review" per the Distribution MR workflow
Review checklist
Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.
-
If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert. - Technical writer review items:
-
Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date. -
Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR. - If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
-
The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior
, say something likeDefault behavior when you close an issue
. -
The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK
, say something likeConfigure GDK
. -
Any task steps should be written as a numbered list. - If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
-
-
-
Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the above reviews. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review. -
Ensure a release milestone is set.
Edited by João Alexandre Cunha