144 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
144 lines
3.3 KiB
Markdown
## PR Feedback
|
|
|
|
Efficiently handle Pull Request review comments and achieve root cause resolution using a 3-stage error analysis approach.
|
|
|
|
### Usage
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Retrieve and analyze review comments
|
|
gh pr view --comments
|
|
"Classify review comments by priority and create an action plan"
|
|
|
|
# Detailed analysis of error-related comments
|
|
gh pr checks
|
|
"Analyze CI errors using a 3-stage approach to identify root causes"
|
|
|
|
# Quality confirmation after fixes
|
|
npm test && npm run lint
|
|
"Fixes are complete - please check regression tests and code quality"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Basic Examples
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Classify comments
|
|
gh pr view 123 --comments | head -20
|
|
"Classify review comments into must/imo/nits/q categories and determine response order"
|
|
|
|
# Collect error information
|
|
npm run build 2>&1 | tee error.log
|
|
"Identify the root cause of build errors and suggest appropriate fixes"
|
|
|
|
# Verify fix implementation
|
|
git diff HEAD~1
|
|
"Evaluate whether this fix appropriately addresses the review comments"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Comment Classification System
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
🔴 must: Required fixes
|
|
├─ Security issues
|
|
├─ Functional bugs
|
|
├─ Design principle violations
|
|
└─ Convention violations
|
|
|
|
🟡 imo: Improvement suggestions
|
|
├─ Better implementation methods
|
|
├─ Performance improvements
|
|
├─ Readability enhancements
|
|
└─ Refactoring proposals
|
|
|
|
🟢 nits: Minor points
|
|
├─ Typo fixes
|
|
├─ Indentation adjustments
|
|
├─ Comment additions
|
|
└─ Naming refinements
|
|
|
|
🔵 q: Questions/confirmations
|
|
├─ Implementation intent verification
|
|
├─ Specification clarification
|
|
├─ Design decision background
|
|
└─ Alternative solution consideration
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### 3-Stage Error Analysis Approach
|
|
|
|
#### Stage 1: Information Collection
|
|
|
|
**Required actions**
|
|
|
|
- Full error message capture
|
|
- Stack trace review
|
|
- Reproduction condition identification
|
|
|
|
**Recommended actions**
|
|
|
|
- Environment information collection
|
|
- Recent change history
|
|
- Related logs review
|
|
|
|
#### Stage 2: Root Cause Analysis
|
|
|
|
- 5 Whys analysis application
|
|
- Dependency tracking
|
|
- Environment difference checking
|
|
- Minimal reproduction code creation
|
|
|
|
#### Stage 3: Solution Implementation
|
|
|
|
- Immediate response (hotfix)
|
|
- Root cause resolution (essential fix)
|
|
- Preventive measures (recurrence prevention)
|
|
|
|
### Response Flow
|
|
|
|
1. **Comment analysis**: Classification by priority
|
|
2. **Fix plan**: Determining response order
|
|
3. **Phased fixes**: Critical → High → Medium → Low
|
|
4. **Quality confirmation**: Testing, linting, building
|
|
5. **Progress report**: Description of specific fixes
|
|
|
|
### Post-Fix Verification
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
# Basic checks
|
|
npm test
|
|
npm run lint
|
|
npm run build
|
|
|
|
# Regression tests
|
|
npm run test:e2e
|
|
|
|
# Code quality
|
|
npm run test:coverage
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Reply Templates
|
|
|
|
**Fix completion report**
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
@reviewer Thank you for your feedback.
|
|
Fixes are complete:
|
|
|
|
- [Specific fix details]
|
|
- [Test results]
|
|
- [Verification method]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Technical decision explanation**
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
Implementation background: [Reason]
|
|
Considered alternatives: [Options and decision rationale]
|
|
Adopted solution benefits: [Advantages]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Notes
|
|
|
|
- **Priority adherence**: Address in order of Critical → High → Medium → Low
|
|
- **Test first**: Confirm regression tests before making fixes
|
|
- **Clear reporting**: Describe fix details and verification methods specifically
|
|
- **Constructive dialogue**: Polite communication based on technical grounds
|