* They are rarely updated after creation and initial review, and then become hard to follow, especially after important decisions are made
* They are not synced with the code to reflect the eventual solution that is committed
* Google Docs is not a "code-oriented" tool, like Markdown can be
* Review in Google Docs is not as simple as a PR code review in GitHub

## Decision

            if label.name == "lang-all":
                is_lang = True
                break
        for review in pr.reviews.nodes:
            if review.author:
                authors[review.author.login] = review.author
                if is_lang:
                    translation_reviewers[review.author.login] += 1
        if pr.state == "MERGED" and pr.author:
            if is_lang:

name: 'Dependency Review'
on: [pull_request]

permissions:
  contents: read

jobs:
  dependency-review:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: 'Checkout Repository'
        uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - name: 'Dependency Review'

* Add the specific language label.
* Add the label `awaiting-review`.

The label `awaiting-review` is special, only used for translations. A GitHub Action will detect it, then it will read the language label, and it will update the GitHub Discussions managing the translations for that language to notify people that there's a new translation to review.

* Suggest a new **feature**.

**Note**: if you do it, then I'm going to ask you to also help others. 😉

## Review Pull Requests { #review-pull-requests }

You can help me review pull requests from others.

Again, please try your best to be kind. 🤗

---

Here's what to keep in mind and how to review a pull request:

### Understand the problem { #understand-the-problem }

        This allows us to keep them consistent and up-to-date.

        If there are several native speakers commenting on this discussion and
        committing to help review new translations, the FastAPI team will review it

    rare occasion we may reject it.

**3. Review**

-   For a valid PR, reviewer (person familiar with the code/functionality)
    checks if the PR looks good or needs additional changes.
-   If all looks good, the reviewer will approve the PR.
-   If a change is needed, the contributor is requested to make the suggested
    change.
-   You make the change and submit it for the review again.

issue if there is one) requesting the feature and describing specific use cases
for it.

If we decide to pursue a feature request, it will go through a thorough process
of API design and review. Any code should come after this.

[APIs]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API
[issue]: https://github.com/google/guava/issues

Pull requests
-------------

    print("docs/en/mkdocs.yml is up to date ✅")


@app.command()
def serve() -> None:
    """
    A quick server to preview a built site with translations.

    For development, prefer the command live (or just mkdocs serve).

    This is here only to preview a site with translations already built.

    Make sure you run the build-all command first.
    """

          * I already hit the "watch" button in this repository to receive notifications and I commit to help at least 2 people that ask questions in the future.
          * Review one Pull Request by downloading the code and following [all the review process](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/help-fastapi/#review-pull-requests).

      options:
        - label: I commit to help with one of those options 👆
          required: true
  - type: textarea
    id: example