Phyx <[email protected]> writes: >> I also don't think one should be allowed to approve their own >> PR. If it is trivial enough to justify a self-accept then someone else >> should also be able to trivially accept it. > > I disagree whole heartedly, as someone who's had to wait weeks for trivial > patches to get reviews no thanks. > We should have a formal definition of what is allowed to get committed as > trivial much like a lot of open source > projects do and go from there. > > I prefer a practical workflow, not just one that works for areas of the > compiler where you have many people working, > It's a very frustrating experience otherwise. > I tend to agree. If someone has commit rights then I generally trust their judgement when it comes to trivial patches. That being said, we should indeed offer more guidance regarding what constitutes "trivial".
We currently have a lack of reviewers and I don't want this lack to become a reason why those contributors we do have might be driven away. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
