> On Dec 13, 2021, at 3:58 PM, Jim Kingdon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It is a fair question and to a fair extent I think we can rely on the
> judgement of the person merging it about how long to wait (subject to the
> more black and white rules about passing the automated checks and - I suppose
> this is black and white except for mathboxes - having at least one approval).
> That is, I think many of us have at least some feel for whether there needs
> to be more discussion or there's a potential for controversy.
I just wanted to get *some* rule on the table so that we aren't stuck forever
waiting for a merge.
As long as the automated tests pass, and it's either in that person's mathbox
or someone else approves it,
it could probably just get merged immediately. I'd suggest at least 24 hours
after posting unless it's
something like an obvious typo/error, but that wouldn't be *necessary*.
It's a pain, but changes *can* be reverted.
> We can also see whether merge conflicts of this sort end up being frequent or
> rare. A bit hard for me to predict in advance, as it depends on how often
> people change the same parts of (well, set.mm especially, the other files to
> a smaller extent).
I suspect that varies. But long delays for merging increase this risk, so it's
good to
merge instead of letting pull requests linger. Which is why I think it's
important to
create *some* rule for merging - otherwise it'll be easy for proposed changes
to linger.
--- David A. Wheeler
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/C28DD19D-C079-4D66-80F8-D9B3707D22A9%40dwheeler.com.
