paperclip/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md at 93291df5c81b89817d7c39bfd6d43c919fc46552

Devin Foley b5f37f11eb docs(contributing): search-first, linked issue, gates + Greptile bar (#7522 )

## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - CONTRIBUTING.md and the PR template are the entry point for new
contributors and set quality expectations for every PR
> - Today they don't tell contributors to search for duplicate/related
work first, don't require a linked GitHub issue, and don't spell out the
merge bar (gates green + Greptile 5/5)
> - Letting duplicate or under-reviewed PRs land creates extra work for
reviewers and erodes quality
> - This PR updates CONTRIBUTING.md and the PR template to require a
search-first workflow, a linked issue, a clear merge bar, and explicit
encouragement to help other contributors land their PRs
> - The benefit is fewer duplicate PRs, easier triage, higher-quality
merges, and a kinder collaboration culture

## What Changed

- `CONTRIBUTING.md`: added a "Before You Start: Search First" section
directing contributors to search GitHub for duplicate PRs and related
issues, with a note that a fresh PR is okay if an old one is dead and
would be painful to merge.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`: require every PR to link a GitHub issue in the
body, plus references to related/duplicate PRs and issues.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`: added a section encouraging contributors to help
finish other people's PRs, thank collaborators, and be kind.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`: tightened the merge bar — all Paperclip CI gates
must be green and Greptile must be 5/5 with no open P2s,
recommendations, or follow-ups.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md` + `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md`: updated the
thinking-path opener to "Paperclip is the open source app people use to
manage AI agents for work" (consistent across examples and template).
- `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md`: checklist gains items for
duplicate/related search, linked issue, gates green, and the Greptile
5/5 bar.

## Verification

- Docs-only change. Reviewed both files render correctly on GitHub.
- No code or tests affected; no CI behavior change beyond the new
checklist items contributors are asked to tick.

## Risks

- Low risk. Documentation and template only — no runtime impact.
Stricter contributor expectations may slow some PRs in the short term.

## Model Used

- Claude, `claude-opus-4-7` (extended thinking, tool use).

## Related

- Issue: #4188 — "Add issue templates and enforce issue-link check on
PRs" (the linked-issue requirement here is a step toward what #4188 asks
for, done in CONTRIBUTING/template rather than CI).
- Prior PR: #4260 — "docs: expand CONTRIBUTING.md and add issue
templates" (open; different scope — issue templates + broader expansion.
This PR is narrower and focused on the search-first + merge-bar
updates.)

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have linked the GitHub issue this PR addresses (and any
related/duplicate issues)
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (docs-only change; no tests
to run)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (N/A — docs)
- [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after
screenshots (N/A — docs)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (will verify after push)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(pending review)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

3.4 KiB

Raw Blame History

Thinking Path

Linked Issues or Issue Description

What Changed

Verification

Risks

Model Used

Checklist

3.4 KiB Raw Blame History

Thinking Path

Linked Issues or Issue Description

What Changed

Verification

Risks

Model Used

Checklist

3.4 KiB

Raw Blame History