simplify issue template, and PR template, and make things optional

[wei-lee]

Description

While it's good have standards, sometimes you they don't fit for everything. I think it will be better if:

1. Make it clear that the standards here are optional. When somebody else creates a repo, if they are not bothered with github templates, they can just copy & paste the ones in this repo and use it. But if they do care about the github templates for their projects, then they are allowed to use their own.
2. Simply the PR template. At the moment, it asks too much questions and most of the time people just ignore them anyway. I prefer to just keep it 2 parts:

• Description
• Verification

Or we make most of things commented out initially, and let people uncomment the section they need.

[camilamacedo86]

Hi @wei-lee,

Thank you for your suggestion. The idea of the template is to guide the contributors to provide the commonly required info. In this way, the PR owner still able to remove one or more section if is not relevant. Following the pros on behalf of the questions/sections adopted:

• The biggest part of the PR without this template has not the info WHAT, and WHY, and HOW and, and STEPS and just move forward because are reviewed for par team-mates
• If an issue be faced this information is helpful in order to investigate the changes performed in the PRs merged which could introduce the issue
• We need to keep in mind that our goal is to build a community and receive PRs from people which are not working with us and not attend our meetings and etc..
• The sections make clear what is expected
• The template makes clear that is expected direct and short answers and not that big descriptions found when the template is not applied which usually do not contain the required data.
• The PR owner will revalidate the PR when it will be filled which will be useful to find issues and/or changes that need be done before asking the review since the suggested questions will make the owner think more about it to clarify the achievement and steps to test it.
• The field to check that the PR was tested by the owner and reviewer push the people to do the tests and avoid we merge issues.

Also, I'd like to share that according to my experience here in CST after we adopted this we were able to make the review process faster and less painful as we reduce the number of issues introduced/merged.

To be honest, I believe that all our products and projects should follow the same standards. I believe that these templates and/or quite similar are applied in at least most of them. Keep the same standards may allow us to work through the teams and projects easier.

This template is based on the template created and used for a while in all FH projects + other templates used in the Aerogear repos before + the collaboration of everybody since it was a subject raised in the ML threads. So, if I could not change your mind by the above argumentation to support we keep it as it is I'd like to kindly request for you start a thread since it cannot be a unilateral decision in my point of view.