search

dgiot / iotStudio

dgiot平台行业应用扩展插件 dgiot for application plugin
https://dgiot-dashboard.vercel.app/
Mozilla Public License 2.0
283 stars 102 forks source link

feat:file Manage #573

Closed dawnwinterLiu closed 2 years ago

dawnwinterLiu commented 2 years ago

Fixes

If your build fails due to your commit message not passing the build checks, please review the guidelines here: https://github.com/dgiot/dgiot/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

Please convert it to a draft if any of the following conditions are not met. Reviewers may skip over until all the items are checked:

Backward Compatibility

More information

pull-checklist[bot] commented 2 years ago

Example Check Group #2 (Click here to edit)

vercel[bot] commented 2 years ago

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Updated
dgiot-dashboard ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview Sep 21, 2022 at 2:56AM (UTC)
pull-request-quantifier-deprecated[bot] commented 2 years ago

This PR has 259 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details

``` Label : Large Size : +186 -73 Percentile : 65.9% Total files changed: 8 Change summary by file extension: .js : +99 -70 .vue : +87 -3 ``` > Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the [PullRequestQuantifier customizations](https://github.com/microsoft/PullRequestQuantifier/blob/main/docs/prquantifier-yaml.md).

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean: - Fast and predictable releases to production: - Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer iterations. - Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times. - Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower: - Bugs are more likely to be detected. - Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected. - Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants: - Small portions can be assimilated better. - Better engineering practices are exercised: - Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems. - Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes. #### What can I do to optimize my changes - Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately - Create a context profile for your repo using the [context generator](https://github.com/microsoft/PullRequestQuantifier/releases) - Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the `Excluded` section from your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Only use the labels that matter to you, [see context specification](./docs/prquantifier-yaml.md) to customize your `prquantifier.yaml` context profile. - Change your engineering behaviors - For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if: - Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead - Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR). #### How to interpret the change counts in git diff output - One line was added: `+1 -0` - One line was deleted: `+0 -1` - One line was modified: `+1 -1` (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion) - Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification) of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? :thumbsup:  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email) Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.