PR_REVIEW.md

Summary

We take PR review seriously. Please read https://medium.com/@mrjoelkemp/giving-better-code-reviews-16109e0fdd36#.xa8lc4i23 to understand how a PR review should be conducted. Be rational and strict in your review, make sure you understand exactly what the submitter's intent is. Anyone in the community can review a PR, but a Prebid Org member is also required. A Prebid Org member should take ownership of a PR and do the initial review.

If the PR is for a standard bid adapter or a standard analytics adapter, just the one review from a core member is sufficient. The reviewer will check against required conventions and may merge the PR after approving and confirming that the documentation PR against prebid.org is open and linked to the issue.

For modules and core platform updates, the initial reviewer should request an additional team member to review as a sanity check. Merge should only happen when the PR has 2 LGTM from the core team and a documentation PR if required.

General PR review Process

• All required global and bidder-adapter rules defined in the Module Rules must be followed. Please review these rules often - we depend on reviewers to enforce them.
• Checkout the branch (these instructions are available on the github PR page as well).
• Verify PR is a single change type. Example, refactor OR bugfix. If more than 1 type, ask submitter to break out requests.
• Verify code under review has at least 80% unit test coverage. If legacy code doesn't have enough unit test coverage, require that additional unit tests to be included in the PR.
• Verify tests are green in Travis-ci + local build by running gulp serve | gulp test
• Verify no code quality violations are present from linting (should be reported in terminal)
• Make sure the code is not setting cookies or localstorage directly -- it must use the StorageManager.
• Review for obvious errors or bad coding practice / use best judgement here.
• If the change is a new feature / change to core prebid.js - review the change with a Tech Lead on the project and make sure they agree with the nature of change.
• If the change results in needing updates to docs (such as public API change, module interface etc), add a label for "needs docs" and inform the submitter they must submit a docs PR to update the appropriate area of Prebid.org before the PR can merge. Help them with finding where the docs are located on prebid.org if needed.
• If all above is good, add a LGTM comment and, if the change is in PBS-core or is an important module like the prebidServerBidAdapter, request 1 additional core member to review.
• Once there are 2 LGTM on the PR, merge to master
• Add a line into the draft release notes for this submission. If no draft release is available, create one using this template

Reviewing a New or Updated Bid Adapter

Documentation they're supposed to be following is https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/bidder-adaptor.html

Follow steps above for general review process. In addition, please verify the following:

• Verify that bidder has submitted valid bid params and that bids are being received.
• Verify that bidder is not manipulating the prebid.js auction in any way or doing things that go against the principles of the project. If unsure check with the Tech Lead.
• Verify that code re-use is being done properly and that changes introduced by a bidder don't impact other bidders.
• If the adapter being submitted is an alias type, check with the bidder contact that is being aliased to make sure it's allowed.
• All bidder parameter conventions must be followed:
  • Video params must be read from AdUnit.mediaTypes.video when available; however bidder config can override the ad unit.
  • First party data must be read from fpd.context and fpd.user.
  • Adapters that accept a floor parameter must also support the floors module -- look for a call to the getFloor() function.
  • Adapters cannot accept an schain parameter. Rather, they must look for the schain parameter at bidRequest.schain.
  • The bidRequest page referrer must checked in addition to any bidder-specific parameter.
  • If they're getting the COPPA flag, it must come from config.getConfig('coppa');
• Below are some examples of bidder specific updates that should require docs update (in their dev-docs/bidders/BIDDER.md file):
  • If they support the GDPR consentManagement module and TCF1, add gdpr_supported: true
  • If they support the GDPR consentManagement module and TCF2, add tcf2_supported: true
  • If they support the US Privacy consentManagementUsp module, add usp_supported: true
  • If they support one or more userId modules, add userId: (list of supported vendors)
  • If they support video and/or native mediaTypes add media_types: video, native. Note that display is added by default. If you don't support display, add "no-display" as the first entry, e.g. media_types: no-display, native
  • If they support COPPA, add coppa_supported: true
  • If they support SChain, add schain_supported: true
  • If their bidder doesn't work well with safeframed creatives, add safeframes_ok: false. This will alert publishers to not use safeframed creatives when creating the ad server entries for their bidder.
  • If they're setting a deal ID in some scenarios, add bidder_supports_deals: true
  • If they have an IAB Global Vendor List ID, add gvl_id: ID. There's no default.
• After a new adapter is approved, let the submitter know they may open a PR in the headerbid-expert repository to have their adapter recognized by the Headerbid Expert extension. The PR should be to the bidder patterns file, adding an entry with their adapter's name and the url the adapter uses to send and receive bid responses.

Reviewing a New or Updated Analytics Adapter

Documentation they're supposed to be following is https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/integrate-with-the-prebid-analytics-api.html

No additional steps above the general review process and making sure it conforms to the Module Rules.

Make sure there's a docs pull request

Reviewing a New or Updated User ID Sub-Module

Documentation they're supposed to be following is https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/modules/userId.html#id-providers

Follow steps above for general review process. In addition:

• Try running the new user ID module with a basic config and confirm it hits the endpoint and stores the results.
• the filename should be camel case ending with IdSystem (e.g. myCompanyIdSystem.js)
• the const MODULE_NAME value should be camel case ending with Id (e.g. myCompanyId )
• the response of the decode method should be an object with the key being ideally camel case similar to the module name and ending in id or Id, but in some cases this value is a shortened name and sometimes with the id part being all lowercase, provided there are no other uppercase letters. if there's no id or it's an invalid object, the response should be undefined. example "valid" values (although this is more style than a requirement)
  • mcid
  • mcId
  • myCompanyId
• make sure they've added references of their new module everywhere required:
  • modules/.submodules.json
  • modules/userId/eids.js
  • modules/userId/eids.md
  • modules/userId/userId.md
• tests can go either within the userId_spec.js file or in their own _spec file if they wish
• GVLID is recommended in the *IdSystem file if they operate in EU
• make sure example configurations align to the actual code (some modules use the userId storage settings and allow pub configuration, while others handle reading/writing cookies on their own, so should not include the storage params in examples)
• the 3 available methods (getId, extendId, decode) should be used as they were intended
  • decode (required method) should not be making requests to retrieve a new ID, it should just be decoding a response
  • extendId (optional method) should not be making requests to retrieve a new ID, it should just be adding additional data to the id object
  • getId (required method) should be the only method that gets a new ID (from ajax calls or a cookie/local storage). this ensures that decode and extend do not unnecessarily delay the auction in places where it is not expected.
• in the eids.js file, the source should be the actual domain of the provider, not a made up domain.
• in the eids.js file, the key in the array should be the same value as the key in the decode function
• make sure all supported config params align in the submodule js file and the docs / examples
• make sure there's a docs pull request

Reviewing a New or Updated Real-Time-Data Sub-Module

Documentation they're supposed to be following is https://docs.prebid.org/dev-docs/add-rtd-submodule.html

Follow steps above for general review process. In addition:

• The RTD Provider must include a providerRtdProvider.md file. This file must have example parameters and document a sense of what to expect: what should change in the bidrequest, or what targeting data should be added?
• Try running the new sub-module and confirm the provided test parameters.
• Make sure the sub-module is making HTTP requests as early as possible, but not more often than needed.
• Consider whether the kind of data the module is obtaining could have privacy implications. If so, make sure they're utilizing the consent data passed to them.
• make sure there's a docs pull request

Ticket Coordinator

Each week, Prebid Org assigns one person to keep an eye on incoming issues and PRs. Every Monday morning a reminder is sent to the prebid-js slack channel with a link to the spreadsheet. If you're on rotation, please check that list each Monday to see if you're on-duty.

When on-duty:

• Review issues and PRs at least once per weekday for new items. Encourage a 48 "SLA" on PRs/issues assigned. Aim for touchpoint once every 48/hours.
• For PRs: assign PRs to individuals on the PR review list. Try to be equitable -- not all PRs are created equally. Use the "Assigned" field and add the "Needs Review" label.
• For Issues: try to address questions and troubleshooting requests on your own, assigning them to others as needed. Please add labels as appropriate (I.E. bug, question, backlog etc).
• Issues that are questions or troubleshooting requests may be closed if the originator doesn't respond within a week to requests for confirmation or details.
• Issues that are bug reports should be left open and assigned to someone in PR rotation to confirm or deny the bug status.
• It's polite to check with others before assigning them extra-large tasks.
• If possible, check in on older PRs and Issues and see if they can be unstuck.
• Perform the weekly Prebid.js release per instructions at https://github.com/prebid/Prebid.js/blob/master/RELEASE_SCHEDULE.md . This generally takes place on Tues or Weds.