Looks good, should be helpful.

This is really nit-picky, but I feel like there could be a little more space between the input for testing and the legend. Compared to the rest of the spacing it seems a little cramped to me

I'm not sure why this is called required-field-legacy. What do you mean by legacy? Is this a convention I don't know about?

Hmm, so the asterisk works in theory, but I'm not sure I love the placement in practice. I wonder if we can play with this a bit more.

Partly, the asterisk is too small. It's nothing but a dot in the screenshot.

There's a different route I'm thinking of, that I'd love for you to try. That would be placing it essentially by the pencil icon, a bit larger. This ties it to the thing you click to edit, rather than being on the other side of the label.

I'd just call this "required".

There's no point in showing the asterisk to users unless they can modify the review request. Perhaps instead, have the function that sets up the editor take an argument for whether or not it's required. It can then place the asterisk when it adds the pencil (ensuring it'll only ever be seen if the user can edit).

This should also only be shown when you can edit.

There should be more of a margin above this. Maybe another 0.5em.

You're right, that is a problem.

So for this particular case, I'd just not show the "*" for these fields and stick that on Reviewers. 

This looks fine, but doesn't apply anymore. Can you update?

I can't view your diff, it seems. :/

Looks pretty good - just one question.

Should the {% if %} and {% endif %} blocks really be indented?  I've seen some of our other template code where we use:

{% if x %}
      <span class="required">*</span>
{%    if y %}
      <span class="other-required">*</span>
{%    endif %}
{% endif %}

So perhaps the if/endif should not be indented at all?

Looks good to me.

Ship It!