Hi Volkan, On 27.10.2025 12:34, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > I must admit that the 2nd option makes me very concerned that rejecting a > maintainers' contribution, which helps with his employer's use case at the > cost of downsides elaborated in the PR comments, ends up being assigned as > a feature implementation task to the reviewer.
My concern with this kind of PR is that, although it originates from an employer-driven use case, the employer quickly disappears from the discussion and never actually participates in the effort. That leaves only three realistic outcomes: - Gary ends up addressing the review feedback in his personal time, - I end up doing it in mine, or - The work stalls indefinitely because neither side has time to finish it. I want to be very clear: I have no interest in wasting Gary’s time, just as I’m sure he doesn’t want to waste mine. Over the past two months he has reviewed and merged more than 40 of my PRs in Commons, so there is no lack of goodwill or collaboration between us. The issue here is simply that we’ve hit a deadlock on this PR, and we need to find a constructive way forward that doesn’t overload either side. Piotr
