ethyca
Update review requirements for low-risk changes
Is your feature request related to a specific problem?
Right now it can be oppressive to merge a relatively simple file change, such as a CHANGELOG update that then triggers an entire build/test suite.
Describe the solution you'd like
Where possible, aka where there is minimal risk, we should decrease the friction to make small changes. This should be a general audit of our review rules, what triggers various code checks in PRs, etc.
@ethyca/fidesctl-team any ideas here for things we should simplify/streamline?
for instance not running tests on CHANGELOG changes and not requiring a reviewer for CHANGELOG changes?
Looking for insight here on where the team feels there is potentially unnecessary friction in the dev process
I think this would be a big enabler as part of the release process, can see this being handy with cutting a release 👍🏽 thanks for opening this up!
@SteveDMurphy any more thoughts here? am I good to close this? still any major issues we can think of that we could address here? although this is technically no longer in my ballpark!
Definitely ok to close 👍🏽 (especially in light of the new release process) - thanks @ThomasLaPiana !