Skip to content

docs: update release guidelines - #5035

Open
johnmtll wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
johnmtll/update-release-practices-callouts
Open

docs: update release guidelines#5035
johnmtll wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
johnmtll/update-release-practices-callouts

Conversation

@johnmtll

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Summary of Changes

Updates the release guidelines to callout that we should add the 'team review' label to give other engineers enough time to contribute.

Notes for Reviewers

What is the motivation for this change?

Release Highlight

Release notes highlight

Double check the following

  • Lint is passing (npm run check:lint)
  • Self-review completed using the steps outlined here
  • PR title follows the correct format: type(NODE-xxxx)[!]: description
    • Example: feat(NODE-1234)!: rewriting everything in coffeescript
  • Changes are covered by tests
  • New TODOs have a related JIRA ticket

Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings August 25, 2026 14:49
@johnmtll
johnmtll requested a review from a team as a code owner August 25, 2026 14:49

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the project’s release process documentation to explicitly include a “Team Review” labeling step on release PRs, ensuring a short review window for additional engineering feedback before merge/release.

Changes:

  • Add a new step in the release checklist instructing maintainers to apply the Team Review label to release PRs as a pre-merge review grace period.

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants