On 09/19/2015 06:22 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote: > And how do we do that? Can we enforce this technically or will that be > weakened over the time the same way as we just turned the mirror into "let's > accept pull requests"?
This wishy-washy stuff is nonsense. The sole argument for enabling GitHub pull requests essentially boils down to "we have things to gain from pandering to GitHub's audience that offset all other costs", so when you limit the experience for that audience anyway, the argument largely loses its merit. Doing GitHub badly is worse than not doing GitHub at all. It's either all-in or all-out. I'd like the pro side to be honest about that, instead of doing this inching-toward-their-goal stuff. Ultimately, this is about two conflicts: * Ideological: Do you believe KDE can maintain its core free software philosophy while subjecting itself to the general tooling fashion cycle or not? * Workflow: Do you think the day-to-day work experience will be better or worse? Cheers, Eike _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
