[FB: ] Proposal: Define QA Points

[Silvanoc]

Feedback Type

Bug/Issue

Feedback

Where is Quality Assurance (QA) taking place? Are we applying full-blown QA on the main branch? Are we applying it only on releases and main is only under lightweighter QA?

Rational

Defining QA points helps deciding if a development branch is needed or not. If full-blown QA is only applied on releases, then a development branch might not be needed. If we want to always guarantee quality on main branch, then a development branch is recommendable. See #172 for more information.

The QA points also help defining the merging policies. See #173 for more information.

[nilanjan-samajdar]

We need to maintain a stable main.
This may be implemented through -

• A strict PR approval process for main branch submissions
• A set of sanity tests run as Github Actions automatically on submission to main.
• Anything else, we are open to discuss

[Silvanoc]

This issue is about transparency. Meaning that those criteria should be prominently documented. For example, the "strict PR approval process".