• Is it mergeable?
• Did it pass the tests?
• If it introduces new functionality in scripts/ is it tested?
  Check for code coverage with make clean diff-cover
• Is it well formatted? Look at make pep8, make diff_pylint_report,
  make cppcheck, and make doc output. Use make format and manual
  fixing as needed.
• Did it change the command-line interface? Only additions are allowed
  without a major version increment. Changing file formats also requires a
  major version number increment.
• Is it documented in the ChangeLog?
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changelog#Format
• Was a spellchecker run on the source code and documentation after
  changes were made?

can I get two pairs of eyes to look over this? @b-wyss @bocajnotnef @brtaylor92 @wrightmhw

LGTM, minus the merge conflict; do a git pull [whichever remote gedlab is] master and watch for the conflict.

Uhh, should this have been merged, @mr-c?

Technically no, but the end result of the CR was that it should be merged.
(I attempted to revert, then attempted to revert my revert and I'm not
totally certain where that landed. @mr-c said he would sort it out the next
time he was on the ground.)

On Sat, Apr 18, 2015, 20:28 C. Titus Brown notifications@github.com wrote:

Uhh, should this have been merged, @mr-c https://github.com/mr-c?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#901 (comment).

OK. I see fragmented versions of that conversation on slack, too; in the future, let's please document in the issue/PR itself :)