On Thursday, 9 February 2017 at 09:49:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
In any case, shouldn't it be an uphill battle to merge things?
There are a lot of things that need to be satisfied to merge
something. Being too hasty leads to legacy code that we come to
regret, angry people whose code was broken, and technical debt.
There's a difference between it being an uphill battle because
review and feedback are careful, cautious, in-depth and strict
(as they should be!), versus it being an uphill battle because no
feedback or interest is being offered and PRs are left to bitrot.
I accept that there are a lot of things that need to be satisfied
to merge something. Personally speaking, I'm willing to endure
any number of rebases and conflict-fixes, so long as I'm getting
feedback and engagement that allows my PR to become better code.
It's when I'm _not_ getting any indicators as to what needs to be
satisfied that things become problematic.