On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Walter Bright <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 10/10/2014 12:14 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote: > >> I can't say I've seen you making bad decisions because of this. In an > > ideal world you wouldn't be put in this position, but it's a lot > better than the alternative of_never_ getting a decision on > enhancements. > > I've pulled quite a few enhancements. The changelog is full of them.
And how many of those didn't have pull requests? > >> I would consider both of those merged enhancements as arguably making >> existing features work correctly. > > This thread is not about whether those were good enhancements or not, it's > about the process. > The process is broken because you obviously don't have time to manually approve every single pull request that could potentially be seen as an enhancement. I think it's reasonable for decisions on enhancements that can reasonably be seen as 'removing unnecessary limitations and inconsistencies of existing features' to be made by contributors other than you. _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
