Dmitry Olshansky, el 8 de March a las 12:33 me escribiste: > There is got to be more effective process to merge stuff. Current > situation involves ping-pong between commiter/reviewer and > contributor on every minor nit there is. That basically involves > reviewing the same exact code few times over as cleanup arrives some > days later. And even when contributor think he did cleanup > something, he/she may as well miss what's the deal and the cycle > repeats. > > Instead it's definitely possible for committer to checkout the pull, > do an extra cleanup commit (with automatic tool possibly, like > detab/toln and I'd love to see official "indent" for D) and push it > to the main repo. (Or squash the commits. This doesn't cancel out > reviewing anything non-trivial by at least 2 persons.)
I think this is the wrong approach. People need to learn how to do a proper pull request, you can't get the committers doing cleaning work after contributors. Is a learning process, once you get it right, your pull requests shouldn't too many cycles to get accepted. -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Algún día los libros desterrarán a la radio y el hombre descubrirá el oculto poder del Amargo Serrano. -- Ricardo Vaporeso. El Bolsón, 1909.
