You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beam.apache.org by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> on 2026/09/29 18:05:30 UTC
[DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Hi all,
For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description "PLEASE
add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left there.
- Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template without
modifying it [unmodified].
- There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same time.
[total]
- In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just say
"Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
So my thoughts on this:
- A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is probably
satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it without any
template begging them to do it)
- A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
- The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should be
automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
- A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or taken
directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need the
template.
- We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description and
fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description, or
tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
WDYT?
I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
Kenn
[unmodified]
https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
[total]
https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Robert Burke <ro...@frantil.com>.
SGTM
Especially in this day and age if the Claudes and Geminis of the world
aren't following the template, it's likely not providing enough path
shortening value.
I'm hesitant to just have an empty template, since the point of a template
is to provide that guidance. People who do not read cannot be helped.
That said, if we ensure the CONTRIBUTING.md guide has all the guidance and
replace the template with a stern "THIS IS AN UNEDITED TEMPLATE, PR AUTHORS
SHOULD REFER TO CONTRIBUTING.md AND PROVIDE A MEANINGFUL PR DESCRIPTION"
warning instead, it'll be sufficient for people who read, while taking up
much less space an the current template.
Robert Burke
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, 7:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>
> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description "PLEASE
> add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left there.
>
>
> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
> without modifying it [unmodified].
> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same time.
> [total]
> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just say
> "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>
> So my thoughts on this:
>
> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is probably
> satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it without any
> template begging them to do it)
> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should be
> automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or taken
> directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need the
> template.
> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description and
> fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>
> WDYT?
>
> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>
> Kenn
>
> [unmodified]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>
> [total]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
Thanks for the varied feedback. I've updated to PR to just simplify the
template rather than remove it, keeping the pointers to CHANGES.md, filing
an ICLA, GitHub issue references, and CONTRIBUTING.md
Kenn
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 3:14 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev via dev <
dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
> I noticed new contributors often mention their changes in CHANGES.md, a
> hint they likely picked up from the template. Contributor tips seem useful
> too, so I'd rather keep the template. We can clarify or shorten to only
> keep what's useful.
>
> On my PRs I usually delete the template and write my own description.
>
> > I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left
> there.
>
> PRs should have a meaningful description unless the title explains
> everything. I would encourage asking the author to add one or edit the
> description before merge.
>
> We could also change the "PLEASE line" into smth like:
>
> <Replace this template with PR description unless self-explanatory from
> title> to make it less unpleasant when people ignore it.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:43 AM Jack McCluskey via dev <
> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>
>> A lot of the boilerplate is largely for new contributors. Leaving or
>> removing the boilerplate isn't going to make a difference to the regular
>> contributors but could add some friction to new ones. That being said,
>> it's pretty annoying as a code reviewer to get a pull request with a
>> title and no other context. I'm not asking for the overwritten, fully
>> formatted LLM PR summaries, but a quick explanation of what intent of the
>> PR is would be helpful. It would be great if Beam contributors as a whole
>> could be more consistent in that effort... I worry that ditching the
>> template will further encourage the pattern of PRs only coming with titles.
>>
>> So my opinion is "leave it and try to be more active as a community in
>> writing PR descriptions" without enforcing it via infrastructure.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM Danny McCormick via dev <
>> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think it helps
>>> me review changes from committers. But I do wonder if it is helpful for new
>>> contributors (IMO this is who the feature is for).
>>>
>>> My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
>>> 2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
>>>
>>>
>>> Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Danny
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>>>>
>>>> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
>>>> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just
>>>> left there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
>>>> without modifying it [unmodified].
>>>> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same
>>>> time. [total]
>>>> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just
>>>> say "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>>>>
>>>> So my thoughts on this:
>>>>
>>>> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is
>>>> probably satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it
>>>> without any template begging them to do it)
>>>> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
>>>> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should
>>>> be automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
>>>> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or
>>>> taken directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need
>>>> the template.
>>>> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description
>>>> and fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
>>>> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>>>>
>>>> Kenn
>>>>
>>>> [unmodified]
>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>>>>
>>>> [total]
>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>>>>
>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
All good points. Tale a look at the PR. I think the current draft keeps the
spirit and is hopefully more inviting by removing noise and inaccuracies.
Kenn
On Mon, Oct 5, 2026 at 3:13 PM Jan Lukavský <je...@seznam.cz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the template is a little too much verbose, but otherwise it is
> useful (agree, mostly for new contributors, but that is the point of it). I
> would not go with replacing "PLEASE" with a text that should be more
> unpleasant, because our interest should not be to create friction, but the
> other way around - trying to invite people in.
>
> I'll leave it as is or we can shorten it, but I'd keep the spirit.
>
> Jan
> On 9/29/26 21:07, Valentyn Tymofieiev via dev wrote:
>
> I noticed new contributors often mention their changes in CHANGES.md, a
> hint they likely picked up from the template. Contributor tips seem useful
> too, so I'd rather keep the template. We can clarify or shorten to only
> keep what's useful.
>
> On my PRs I usually delete the template and write my own description.
>
> > I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left
> there.
>
> PRs should have a meaningful description unless the title explains
> everything. I would encourage asking the author to add one or edit the
> description before merge.
>
> We could also change the "PLEASE line" into smth like:
>
> <Replace this template with PR description unless self-explanatory from
> title> to make it less unpleasant when people ignore it.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:43 AM Jack McCluskey via dev <
> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>
>> A lot of the boilerplate is largely for new contributors. Leaving or
>> removing the boilerplate isn't going to make a difference to the regular
>> contributors but could add some friction to new ones. That being said,
>> it's pretty annoying as a code reviewer to get a pull request with a
>> title and no other context. I'm not asking for the overwritten, fully
>> formatted LLM PR summaries, but a quick explanation of what intent of the
>> PR is would be helpful. It would be great if Beam contributors as a whole
>> could be more consistent in that effort... I worry that ditching the
>> template will further encourage the pattern of PRs only coming with titles.
>>
>> So my opinion is "leave it and try to be more active as a community in
>> writing PR descriptions" without enforcing it via infrastructure.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM Danny McCormick via dev <
>> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think it helps
>>> me review changes from committers. But I do wonder if it is helpful for new
>>> contributors (IMO this is who the feature is for).
>>>
>>> My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
>>> 2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
>>>
>>>
>>> Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Danny
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>>>>
>>>> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
>>>> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just
>>>> left there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
>>>> without modifying it [unmodified].
>>>> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same
>>>> time. [total]
>>>> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just
>>>> say "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>>>>
>>>> So my thoughts on this:
>>>>
>>>> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is
>>>> probably satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it
>>>> without any template begging them to do it)
>>>> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
>>>> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should
>>>> be automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
>>>> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or
>>>> taken directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need
>>>> the template.
>>>> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description
>>>> and fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
>>>> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>>>>
>>>> Kenn
>>>>
>>>> [unmodified]
>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>>>>
>>>> [total]
>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>>>>
>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Jan Lukavský <je...@seznam.cz>.
Hi,
I think the template is a little too much verbose, but otherwise it is
useful (agree, mostly for new contributors, but that is the point of
it). I would not go with replacing "PLEASE" with a text that should be
more unpleasant, because our interest should not be to create friction,
but the other way around - trying to invite people in.
I'll leave it as is or we can shorten it, but I'd keep the spirit.
Jan
On 9/29/26 21:07, Valentyn Tymofieiev via dev wrote:
> I noticed new contributors often mention their changes in CHANGES.md,
> a hint they likely picked up from the template. Contributor tips seem
> useful too, so I'd rather keep the template. We can clarify or
> shorten to only keep what's useful.
>
> On my PRs I usually delete the template and write my own description.
>
> > I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just
> left there.
>
> PRs should have a meaningful description unless the title explains
> everything. I would encourage asking the author to add one or edit the
> description before merge.
>
> We could also change the "PLEASE line" into smth like:
>
> <Replace this template with PR description unless self-explanatory
> from title> to make it less unpleasant when people ignore it.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:43 AM Jack McCluskey via dev
> <de...@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>
> A lot of the boilerplate is largely for new contributors. Leaving
> or removing the boilerplate isn't going to make a difference to
> the regular contributors but could add some friction to new ones.
> That being said, it's pretty annoying as a code reviewer to get a
> pull request witha title and no other context. I'm not asking for
> the overwritten, fully formatted LLM PR summaries, but a quick
> explanation of what intent of the PR is would be helpful. It would
> be great if Beam contributors as a whole could be more consistent
> in that effort... I worry that ditching the template will further
> encourage the pattern of PRs only coming with titles.
>
> So my opinion is "leave it and try to be more active as a
> community in writing PR descriptions" without enforcing it via
> infrastructure.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM Danny McCormick via dev
> <de...@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>
> I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think
> it helps me review changes from committers. But I do wonder if
> it is helpful for new contributors (IMO this is who the
> feature is for).
>
> My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
>
> 1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
> 2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
>
>
> Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
>
> Thanks,
> Danny
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles
> <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>
> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the
> description "PLEASE add a meaningful description here"
> from the template, just left there.
>
> * Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the
> template without modifying it [unmodified].
> * There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in
> the same time. [total]
> * In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just
> blank or just say "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up
> to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>
> So my thoughts on this:
>
> * A rate of 75% of people actually describing their
> change is probably satisfied by the null hypothesis:
> this many people would do it without any template
> begging them to do it)
> * A fully blank PR field might even be /more/ likely to
> be edited.
> * The other stuff in the template is really mostly
> noise, or should be automation. (like choosing a
> reviewer or the CI status badges)
> * A lot of PRs now have their description written by an
> LLM, or taken directly from the commit text (also
> written by LLM) so we don't need the template.
> * We could have an LLM check if they actually added a
> description and fail the check, (with a shortcut for
> totally unmodified description, or tiny edit distance,
> that uses zero tokens)
>
> WDYT?
>
> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>
> Kenn
>
> [unmodified]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>
> [total]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Valentyn Tymofieiev via dev <de...@beam.apache.org>.
I noticed new contributors often mention their changes in CHANGES.md, a
hint they likely picked up from the template. Contributor tips seem useful
too, so I'd rather keep the template. We can clarify or shorten to only
keep what's useful.
On my PRs I usually delete the template and write my own description.
> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description "PLEASE
add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left there.
PRs should have a meaningful description unless the title explains
everything. I would encourage asking the author to add one or edit the
description before merge.
We could also change the "PLEASE line" into smth like:
<Replace this template with PR description unless self-explanatory from
title> to make it less unpleasant when people ignore it.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:43 AM Jack McCluskey via dev <de...@beam.apache.org>
wrote:
> A lot of the boilerplate is largely for new contributors. Leaving or
> removing the boilerplate isn't going to make a difference to the regular
> contributors but could add some friction to new ones. That being said,
> it's pretty annoying as a code reviewer to get a pull request with a
> title and no other context. I'm not asking for the overwritten, fully
> formatted LLM PR summaries, but a quick explanation of what intent of the
> PR is would be helpful. It would be great if Beam contributors as a whole
> could be more consistent in that effort... I worry that ditching the
> template will further encourage the pattern of PRs only coming with titles.
>
> So my opinion is "leave it and try to be more active as a community in
> writing PR descriptions" without enforcing it via infrastructure.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM Danny McCormick via dev <
> dev@beam.apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think it helps
>> me review changes from committers. But I do wonder if it is helpful for new
>> contributors (IMO this is who the feature is for).
>>
>> My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
>>
>>
>> 1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
>> 2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
>>
>>
>> Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Danny
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>>>
>>> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
>>> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left
>>> there.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
>>> without modifying it [unmodified].
>>> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same
>>> time. [total]
>>> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just
>>> say "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>>>
>>> So my thoughts on this:
>>>
>>> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is
>>> probably satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it
>>> without any template begging them to do it)
>>> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
>>> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should
>>> be automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
>>> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or
>>> taken directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need
>>> the template.
>>> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description
>>> and fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
>>> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>>>
>>> Kenn
>>>
>>> [unmodified]
>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>>>
>>> [total]
>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Jack McCluskey via dev <de...@beam.apache.org>.
A lot of the boilerplate is largely for new contributors. Leaving or
removing the boilerplate isn't going to make a difference to the regular
contributors but could add some friction to new ones. That being said, it's
pretty annoying as a code reviewer to get a pull request with a title and
no other context. I'm not asking for the overwritten, fully formatted LLM
PR summaries, but a quick explanation of what intent of the PR is would be
helpful. It would be great if Beam contributors as a whole could be more
consistent in that effort... I worry that ditching the template will
further encourage the pattern of PRs only coming with titles.
So my opinion is "leave it and try to be more active as a community in
writing PR descriptions" without enforcing it via infrastructure.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25 PM Danny McCormick via dev <de...@beam.apache.org>
wrote:
> I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think it helps me
> review changes from committers. But I do wonder if it is helpful for new
> contributors (IMO this is who the feature is for).
>
> My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
>
>
> 1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
> 2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
>
>
> Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
>
> Thanks,
> Danny
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>>
>> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description
>> "PLEASE add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left
>> there.
>>
>>
>> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
>> without modifying it [unmodified].
>> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same
>> time. [total]
>> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just say
>> "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>>
>> So my thoughts on this:
>>
>> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is
>> probably satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it
>> without any template begging them to do it)
>> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
>> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should
>> be automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
>> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or taken
>> directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need the
>> template.
>> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description and
>> fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
>> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>> [unmodified]
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>>
>> [total]
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] remove the pull request template
Posted by Danny McCormick via dev <de...@beam.apache.org>.
I find the template useless for my own work, and I don't think it helps me
review changes from committers. But I do wonder if it is helpful for new
contributors (IMO this is who the feature is for).
My (unsubstantiated) opinion is that:
1. It is useless for most people, but also harmless
2. It probably sometimes helps new contributors
Given that, I'd vote to leave it, but I don't care very much.
Thanks,
Danny
On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 2:06 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For discussion: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/40339
>
> I just reviewed yet another pull request that has the description "PLEASE
> add a meaningful description here" from the template, just left there.
>
>
> - Since 2026-01-01 it looks like 370+ PRs have left the template
> without modifying it [unmodified].
> - There are a total of about 1800 non-dependabot PRs in the same time.
> [total]
> - In fact, of the 1430 others, quite a few are just blank or just say
> "Fixes #<issue>" so I would round up to 25% "blank" descriptions.
>
> So my thoughts on this:
>
> - A rate of 75% of people actually describing their change is probably
> satisfied by the null hypothesis: this many people would do it without any
> template begging them to do it)
> - A fully blank PR field might even be *more* likely to be edited.
> - The other stuff in the template is really mostly noise, or should be
> automation. (like choosing a reviewer or the CI status badges)
> - A lot of PRs now have their description written by an LLM, or taken
> directly from the commit text (also written by LLM) so we don't need the
> template.
> - We could have an LLM check if they actually added a description and
> fail the check, (with a shortcut for totally unmodified description,
> or tiny edit distance, that uses zero tokens)
>
> WDYT?
>
> I'm just in a "cleaning up extra / old stuff" mood lately.
>
> Kenn
>
> [unmodified]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+%22add+a+meaningful+description%22
>
> [total]
> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?q=is%3Apr+state%3Aclosed++created%3A%3E%3D2026-01-01+-author%3Aapp%2Fdependabot
>