Centralize Issue and Pull Request templates for (most) repos to the .github repo about top-meta HOT 3 OPEN

I've recently worked on updating them and a lot of the checkboxes under Pull Request Requirements are different on each of the repos.

Yeah I just looked and they diverge a lot more than I remember; that probably puts a PR template out of the question then (mostly caused by all of the exercise repo's have you included the <insert solution variant> in your changes)

from top-meta.

It is a good idea to centralize what we can, but I do not think we can use one PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md for all of the repositories.

I've recently worked on updating them and a lot of the checkboxes under Pull Request Requirements are different on each of the repos. For example, the suggested title of the PR is different on a lot of the repos. On the main site, we ask for tests to be written for new features. On exercise repos we also ask for solutions to be updated.

If we consolidated them, we would need a lot of checkboxes with wording like "If applicable..." and I think contributors would get lost on knowing if it is applicable.

from top-meta.

So I had some free time today, and came up with this. yes means that the file matched the standard file, when comparing against the ones in theodinproject repo, as I assume thats where they got copied from. Almost none of the PR templates match; except for one minor difference most of issue templates do match (also if someone has the free time to check my work I'd greatly appreciate it; I think I got them all correct but its entirely possible I missed something)

* Only contains note on spellchecker; set up code-spell?
** Only difference is the example location****; can probably be dropped as long as the checkbox remains?
*** N/A: Intended Default

**** By this I mean that they contain some variation on the following line - [ ] The title of this issue follows the location for request: brief description of request format, e.g. <repo specific location>: <sometimes repo specific example. This is the only piece of information I think could be safely dropped by generalizing to just - [ ] The title of this issue follows the location for request: brief description of request format

from top-meta.