I know it can seem frustrating at times. Believe me, I've felt the same way numerous times. When that happens, I've always told myself to just "take a deep breath" and pace myself.
Your comments are valid but remember, everyone can have a different opinion about the same issue. And that's what I'm hearing from your comments. I've learned there are some members of the team that sometimes will not "be happy" with a change, whatever it is, that I make. That's when I advocate if I feel strongly about it. But, I've tried to observe when that happens so that I can anticipate it. There are a lot of interactions at play here, observe them as it will help you in the future. Treat it as a learning exercise. My work tends to fall into the "code janitor" category. I take pride in that. So for example, I can directly tie my code cleanup to a reduction in warning messages. That's tangible. But, I also understand that it might take a lower priority than a feature that is trying to be integrated into the source tree. When I first started, I really tried, and still do, to put myself into the shoes of "what am I asking the committer to do"? It will help you to have a better understanding of what's happening. -brad w. On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 9:19 AM Łukasz Bownik <lukasz.bow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. > I read the latest discussions and as a relatively new contributor I got > contradictory guidance/experience. What I generally refer to is (in no > particular order): > > 1. "we welcome contributions" vs "we want less noise" > 2. "we want small PRs" vs "we want big PRs" > 3. "we want small PRs" vs "we want to save CI resources" > 4. "we want new tests" VS "we already have too many tests" > 5. "our tests are not good enough" vs "out tests already run for hours" > 6. "we want to improve our tests" vs "test improvement PRs are noise" > 7. "we want to keep code clean" vs "code cleanup PRs are noise" > 8. "we welcome new contributors" vs "we want high value/impact PRs from day > one" > 9. "we want contributors to talk to to us" vs "we ignore emails from them" > 10. "we want 100% backward compatibility" vs "we let plugins to disappear > from the 'available' list all the time" > > So I think it might be a good idea for the core theme to sit, discuss and > create a document ironing out these issues and laying a general process > that should be followed by contributors. > > Best regards. > -- > Łukasz Bownik >
