2573dba8ed
Converted GitHub issue templates from Markdown to YAML Issue Forms with required field enforcement. Added documentation template. Updated PR template with local validation checkbox. Changes: - Added config.yml to disable blank issues and route to Discussions/Security - Converted bug_report, feature_request, performance_regression to .yml forms - Added documentation.yml template for docs issues - Updated security.yml as reference redirect to SECURITY.md - Updated PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md with local validation checkbox - Bug template enforces pdftract doctor output as required field Closes: pdftract-f29c Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
75 lines
2.6 KiB
YAML
75 lines
2.6 KiB
YAML
name: Feature request
|
|
description: Suggest an enhancement or new feature for pdftract
|
|
title: '[FEATURE] '
|
|
labels: [enhancement]
|
|
body:
|
|
- type: markdown
|
|
attributes:
|
|
value: |
|
|
Thanks for suggesting a feature! Please take a moment to search for existing feature requests to avoid duplicates.
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: use_case
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Use case
|
|
description: Describe the specific problem this feature would solve. Who would benefit from this feature?
|
|
placeholder: |
|
|
As a user working with scientific papers, I need to extract tables as structured data so that I can analyze experimental results without manual transcription.
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: proposed_solution
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Proposed solution
|
|
description: How do you envision this feature working? Include API design, CLI flags, or output formats if applicable.
|
|
placeholder: |
|
|
- API: `pub fn extract_tables(&mut self) -> Result<Vec<Table>>`
|
|
- CLI: `pdftract extract --tables input.pdf`
|
|
- Output: JSON with rows, columns, and cell text
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: alternatives
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Alternatives considered
|
|
description: Describe any alternative solutions or workarounds you've considered. Why aren't they sufficient?
|
|
placeholder: |
|
|
I've tried using X, but it doesn't work because...
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: true
|
|
|
|
- type: textarea
|
|
id: additional_context
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Additional context
|
|
description: Add any other context, screenshots, or example files that demonstrate the need for this feature.
|
|
placeholder: |
|
|
- Links to related issues or PRs
|
|
- References to similar features in other tools (tabula, pdftotext, etc.)
|
|
- Example PDF files that demonstrate the need
|
|
- Draft API designs or pseudocode
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: false
|
|
|
|
- type: dropdown
|
|
id: willing_to_implement
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Are you willing to implement this feature?
|
|
description: This helps us understand if you'll be submitting a pull request.
|
|
options:
|
|
- Yes, I'll submit a PR
|
|
- Maybe, I'd like guidance first
|
|
- No, I'm just suggesting the idea
|
|
validations:
|
|
required: false
|
|
|
|
- type: checkboxes
|
|
id: terms
|
|
attributes:
|
|
label: Code of Conduct
|
|
description: By submitting this issue, you agree to follow our Code of Conduct
|
|
options:
|
|
- label: I agree to follow the Code of Conduct
|
|
required: true
|