On 2/9/2017 8:55 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
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
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. :-(
That certainly does happen, but it isn't quite the case with Nick's PRs.
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.
There's a lot going on needing attention, and sometimes a bit of championing is
needed by their proponents.
Also, please keep in mind that the smaller and more focussed a PR is, the more
likely it'll have a quick resolution.