[Django] #36993: Clarify “N/A - {reason}” usage in PR field in contribution docs

[Django]

#36993: Clarify “N/A - {reason}” usage in PR field in contribution docs
-----------------------------------------+------------------------------
Reporter: JaeHyuckSa | Owner: (none)
Type: Uncategorized | Status: assigned
Component: Documentation | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Keywords: pull_reqeust
Triage Stage: Unreviewed | Has patch: 0
Needs documentation: 0 | Needs tests: 0
Patch needs improvement: 0 | Easy pickings: 0
UI/UX: 0 |
-----------------------------------------+------------------------------
Hello!

Currently, Django requires most pull requests to reference a Trac ticket,
and this is somewhat enforced through the contribution guidelines.

However, in practice, for low-risk PRs such as typo fixes, documentation
updates, and small test additions, proceeding without a ticket under a “no
ticket” approach is also encouraged in the guidelines.

Through a recent discussion on the [Django
Forum](https://forum.djangoproject.com/t/introduce-a-minor-tag-for-low-
risk-prs-that-dont-need-a-trac-ticket/44561/9), it seemed appropriate to
make this intent more explicit by allowing contributors to write a reason
in the ticket field when a PR is intentionally ticketless, such as:

- N/A - typo
- N/A - docs
- N/A - tests

With this in mind, I would like to suggest that we first explicitly
document this pattern in the pull request template and related
documentation.

(While it may be possible to validate guideline compliance later using
GitHub Actions or similar approaches, I think it would be better to first
establish a clear workflow standard through documentation and templates.)
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/36993>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

[Django]

#36993: Clarify “N/A - {reason}” usage in PR field in contribution docs

-------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Reporter: JaeHyuckSa | Owner: JaeHyuckSa

Type: Uncategorized | Status: assigned
Component: Documentation | Version: dev

Severity: Normal | Resolution:

Keywords: pull_reqeust | Triage Stage: Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0

-------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Changes (by JaeHyuckSa):

* owner: (none) => JaeHyuckSa

--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/36993#comment:1>

[Django]

#36993: Clarify “N/A - {reason}” usage in PR field in contribution docs
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Reporter: JaeHyuckSa | Owner: JaeHyuckSa
Type: Uncategorized | Status: assigned
Component: Documentation | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: pull_reqeust | Triage Stage: Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------

Comment (by siri_dasari):

Hi, I would like to work on this issue.
I plan to update the contribution documentation to clarify the use of "N/A
- {reason}" in PRs without tickets.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/36993#comment:2>

[Django]

#36993: Clarify “N/A - {reason}” usage in PR field in contribution docs

-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: JaeHyuckSa | Owner:
Type: | JaeHyuckSa
Cleanup/optimization | Status: assigned

Component: Documentation | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:

Keywords: pull_request | Triage Stage: Accepted

Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0

-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by Jacob Walls):

* keywords: pull_reqeust => pull_request
* stage: Unreviewed => Accepted
* type: Uncategorized => Cleanup/optimization

Comment:

Happy to look at a patch here. I think our stance is that only typo-fixes
go through without a ticket. Sometimes we're a little loose about
enforcing it, but once we have automation for this, it will be a lot
easier to enforce. So let's not change the policy; let's just fix the PR
template to be more specific.

> Hi, I would like to work on this issue.

The author already assigned it to themselves.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/36993#comment:3>