docs: repo-wide PR review guide (CLAUDE.md) + reviewer checklist#310
docs: repo-wide PR review guide (CLAUDE.md) + reviewer checklist#310emjay0921 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a comprehensive contributor and PR review guide in CLAUDE.md and integrates a reviewer checklist into the pull request template. The review feedback suggests clarifying that auto-generated files from oca-gen-addon-readme should not have manual trailing newlines added, and recommends using the more portable ~/ prefix instead of /Users/<you>/ in the local execution examples.
Important
The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.
| - If any `readme/` fragment changed, **regenerate** `README.rst` and | ||
| `static/description/index.html` with the OCA generator | ||
| (`oca-gen-addon-readme`) and commit the regenerated files. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When regenerating files using oca-gen-addon-readme, do not manually add a final newline to the auto-generated files, as any manual changes will be overwritten. The lack of a trailing newline should be addressed in the upstream tool.
| - If any `readme/` fragment changed, **regenerate** `README.rst` and | |
| `static/description/index.html` with the OCA generator | |
| (`oca-gen-addon-readme`) and commit the regenerated files. | |
| - If any `readme/` fragment changed, **regenerate** `README.rst` and | |
| `static/description/index.html` with the OCA generator | |
| (`oca-gen-addon-readme`) and commit the regenerated files. Do not manually add a final newline to these auto-generated files, as manual changes will be overwritten. |
References
- Do not manually add a final newline to files auto-generated by the oca-gen-addon-readme tool, as any manual changes will be overwritten.
| /Users/<you>/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 --files <changed files> | ||
| # regenerate READMEs when a readme/ fragment changed: | ||
| /Users/<you>/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 oca-gen-addon-readme --all-files --hook-stage manual |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using /Users/<you>/ is specific to macOS. Using ~/ is more portable and works across both macOS and Linux environments.
| /Users/<you>/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 --files <changed files> | |
| # regenerate READMEs when a readme/ fragment changed: | |
| /Users/<you>/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 oca-gen-addon-readme --all-files --hook-stage manual | |
| ~/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 --files <changed files> | |
| # regenerate READMEs when a readme/ fragment changed: | |
| ~/Projects/ci-local/run.sh OpenSPP2 oca-gen-addon-readme --all-files --hook-stage manual |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 19.0 #310 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 74.28% 67.79% -6.50%
==========================================
Files 372 94 -278
Lines 25385 8312 -17073
==========================================
- Hits 18857 5635 -13222
+ Misses 6528 2677 -3851
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@emjay0921 I think this should be in https://github.com/ACN-org/acn-workspace/blob/main/internal/claude-config/OpenSPP2/CLAUDE.md. We are standardizing on using the acn-workspace that is why you will notice that there are no claude files in the OpenSPP2 repo.
2 participants
Why is this change needed?
OpenSPP2 has no repo-level PR-review rules today — only a PR body template. Review consistency relies on tribal knowledge, and easy-to-miss rules slip through (most often the per-module
readme/HISTORY.mdentry +__manifest__.pyversion bump). This adds one repo-wide source of truth so both human reviewers and AI-assisted review apply the same checklist.How was the change implemented?
CLAUDE.md— the canonical review guide: a PR Review Checklist (correctness · scope · release hygiene · Odoo 19 · security · tests), a review protocol, the changelog/versioning convention, and a local pre-commit/test quick-reference. Content is grounded in the repo's actual.pre-commit-config.yamlhooks (OCA + theopenspp-*checks) and the Docker test recipe — not invented..github/pull_request_template.md— appended a short Reviewer checklist (- [ ]) that links toCLAUDE.md(no duplicated rule text; single source of truth stays inCLAUDE.md).Modeled on the DSWD
dswd-4ps-dp-openspp-v2-modulerepo, which keeps its review checklist inCLAUDE.md.New unit tests
N/A — documentation only.
Unit tests executed by the author
N/A. Sanity-checked: no trailing whitespace, final newlines present; hook/test references cross-checked against
.pre-commit-config.yamland the module test recipe.How to test manually
Open any new PR and confirm the Reviewer checklist renders in the description; read
CLAUDE.mdat the repo root.Related links
Please weigh in on:
CLAUDE.md(agent-loaded, DSWD precedent) vsAGENTS.mdvs a human-facingCONTRIBUTING.md.19.0after merge (both patterns exist today).