- Does your title concisely summarize your goal?
- Is your code formatted like the rest of the code?
- Does the description provide a self-contained summary of why it exists and what it does?
- Have you anticipated questions you might get?
- What background material is needed to assess your PR?
- Are there alternate approaches? Why are they worse?
-
Do one thing at a time. If there are two fixes in a PR, the reviewer cannot assess them independently. That means no to one means no to both!
-
Summarize background material. It is great to have links to relevant discussions or information, but only links makes it much harder to piece together the important points. If your reviewer needs to know something, try to summarize it in a helpful way.
-
Be friendly! Everyone is working hard and trying to be effective.
-
Have healthy expectations. The workflow around Elm is optimized for throughput, not latency. This has tricky implications, so read more about it here.