Skip to content

add PR template to standardize on expectations of contribution #21

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
iannorriswork merged 3 commits into from
Apr 6, 2026
Merged

add PR template to standardize on expectations of contribution #21

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1c5a652
add PR template to standardize on expectations of contriubtion
Apr 1, 2026
896762d
incorporate feedback
Apr 1, 2026
9a92eb2
one more
Apr 1, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
31 changes: 31 additions & 0 deletions .github/pull_request_template.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
## Jira Ticket
<!-- Please include the relevant Jira ticket link below -->
- [FFS-XXXX](https://jiraent.cms.gov/browse/FFS-XXXX)

## Description
<!-- Provide a summary of the changes and the motivation for this PR -->

## Submitter Checklist
<!-- Please check the boxes below as you complete each task -->
- [ ] **Jira Ticket:** The relevant Jira ticket is linked in the header.
- [ ] **Evidence of Testing:** I have included evidence of bench testing (e.g., terminal output, screenshots, logs) below.
- [ ] **Security Boundary:** I have checked if any security boundaries are changing.
- [ ] If yes, [I have pointed to the relevant Security Impact Analysis (SIA)](https://confluenceent.cms.gov/spaces/SFIV/pages/693666588/Architectural+Decision+Records+ADRs) or escalated to the security team.
- [ ] **Backwards Compatibility:** I have verified that these changes do not introduce any backwards compatibility issues.
- [] If no, I have added appropriate new versions or feature flags and [flagged the team and appropriate stakeholders](https://confluenceent.cms.gov/spaces/SFIV/pages/1325579907/DRAFT+API+Change+Standards)
- [ ] I've updated the Confluence documentation, content in the /docs folder, and any API spec docs
## Reviewer Checklist
<!-- To be completed by the reviewer -->
- [ ] **Verification:** I have verified that the changes work as intended.
- [ ] **Backwards Compatibility:** I have confirmed that the code does not introduce any backwards compatibility issues.
- [ ] **Security & Privacy:** I have reviewed the changes for potential security or privacy risks (e.g., PII handling).
- [ ] **Contract Compliance:** If the public API contract changed, I have verified that it is reflected in `api-spec/` and follows the organization's standards.
- [ ] **Code Quality:** The code is clean, well-tested, and follows the established patterns in the codebase.
- [ ] **Code Quality:** The code has unit and integration tests that cover relevant code changes.

## Evidence of Testing
<!-- Provide evidence of your bench testing here (e.g., `go test` output, CURL results, etc.) -->

```text
Paste test results here
```
Loading