A convention to clarify the intention of a comment in a Pull Request (PR) review using prefixes.
Although it is possible to express the intent in the way the comment is written, it is easier to do so with a simple prefix. Not only it requires less words but it is also easier to take a quick look at the comments and understand what is the intention/meaning of each one.
My rule of thumb is, only reviews that include [req] and/or [q] should Reject the PR. In other cases just make the review a Comment or Approve.
Prefixes
[req] (requested change)
Reviewer believes something should be changed.
[nth] (nice to have)
Reviewer suggests something better/more thorough/common pattern etc.
[pp] (personal preference of the reviewer)
This shows own opinion on style/unification etc. Might influence the author to apply some changes, but does not provide any benefits (it's not for optimization/better interfaces etc.)
[q] (question)
Reviewer would like to get some explanation on topic.
[fixed]
Author fixed/changed based on the comment.
[wont-fix]
Author declines the request. It should be first discussed with reviewer and explained in comment.
Credits
To whoever came up with this convention 😅
If you know let me know, so I can credit & thank them! 🙏
Happy and safe coding ✌️
Top comments (0)