On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 1:15 AM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > It's no surprise to anyone familiar with the QGIS project that we've > got an issue with the Pull Request queue. It's been slowly growing > over time, recently hitting over 150 open requests! It's a bit of an > embarrassment to the project (some of these PRs have been open for > years!), and is likely causing us to lose new contributors and code. > > The usual magic QGIS coding pixies did some work lately and squashed > the queue back below 100 requests. But the remaining ones are all the > difficult, unfinished or orphaned PRs... > > PR reviewing is hard. Not everyone can review every open PR due to > different familiarity with areas of the codebase. (Which is why I > don't think a funding grant to cover this will ever work > successfully). And no-one wants to be the 'bad guy" who closes an > unmerged PR representing someone else's hard work. > > So I propose a "32 by 3.2" sprint, where we ALL collaboratively aim to > reduce the PR queue to <32 open requests before 3.2 release. > > I think we could achieve this by: > > 1. Adopting a hard-line approach to the older, orphaned PRs. Even if > they have some value or reflect real issues, if no-one is interested > in cleaning up the request to get it merge ready then we close it. > > 2. Adopt a "open-one, close-one" guideline for core committers. Heck, > I think every core committer has at least 1 or 2 open PRs representing > various experiments and WIP in unfinished states. These should either > be finished off, or closed and re-opened when the work is actually > ready to go. And for test PRs which are "for comment only" I'd suggest > a QEP is more likely to get better feedback and is the more > appropriate place for this discussion of this nature. > > 3. Closing orphaned or risky PRs which are targeted to 2.18 and which > have been fixed in master branch. > > 4. Sharing the hard work so that the magic pixies don't lose their > magic powers :) > > Thoughts? > These are all good ideas! I'd expecially go for 1, 3 and 4. -- Alessandro Pasotti w3: www.itopen.it
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer