On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 15:18:34 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"ketmar via Digitalmars-d" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
yet the first answers i got were "github or GTFO!" note that i
wasn't
wrote a single word about "take this patches or they will rot
in
bugzilla forever" in my original message. just plain info for
those who
interested. ok, i got the point: either "go github" or don't
contribute. i chosing "don't contribute" in this case.
The choice isn't "github or GTFO", it's just if you don't
submit patches on github they have a much higher chance of
rotting in bugzilla. Relying on others to complete the final
steps of the contribution process will always be less
efficient. Many patches have rotted in bugzilla over the
years, including some of my own.
Exactly. I'm surprised that this has resulted in this much
discussion. github is how we manage and accept contributions.
Patches in bugzilla might end up being turned into a PR by
someone who feels that they want to spend their time submitting
other peope's patches as PR's on github, but not many developers
are going to do that. So, if you post patches to bugzilla, the
odds are high that they will just rot.
Anyone who wants to post patches to bugzilla is free to do so,
but they should do so with the understanding that that is not how
we normally manage contributions and that there's a good chance
that their patch will just sit there and rot.
And I would very much hope that anyone who wanted to contribute
more than just a patch or two would take the time to set up a
github account and figure out how to submit PR's rather than
expect that other developers will spend their time turning those
patches into PR's and making whatever changes are required when
the PR's are reviewed. It works far better if the author of the
changes does that work.
- Jonathan M Davis
