The point Ash is making is also my point. I am actually faster in clicking
resolve now, just to move the PR forward in my mind. That does not
necessarily mean I did a good job at resolving :-).
Bolke.
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 16:26, Elad Kalif <elad...@apache.org> wrote:
> I agree with Ash.
>
> I think leaving threads open is a feature not a problem.
> I used it with referencing todos in new issues and I think it's easier when
> the thread is kept open.
>
> Personally if I have a review that is important to me to follow up on then
> I publish it as request changes not as comment. That way if someone wants
> to override my review he must dismiss it with a note explaining why.
> That is much more powerful.
>
> I am -0 for keeping it.
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 1:07 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > To be clearer about the reason I don't want this
> >
> > Often times someone will leave a comment, and I will reply along the
> lines
> > of "yes, fixed in fixup commit x" and want them to see it if they
> look/come
> > back, but I don't think it's worth blocking merge on waiting for them to
> > approve/resolve/re-review.
> >
> > But if I resolve the thread it then it makes it invisible/requires much
> > more active effort on their part to see it.
> >
> > Similarly, when reviewing I find I have to expand all the resolved
> > discussions to see what has already been said otherwise I end up asking
> the
> > same questions ("why this way?" or "what about case Y?")
> >
> > If GH let discussions be resolved without also collapsing them I'd be +1,
> > but mixing the two mens I prefer _not_ resolving discussions.
> >
> > -a
> >
> > On 31 January 2024 11:00:11 GMT, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >I'm a -1 on keeping this as I don't see it gives us any real benefit
> > other than a rubber-stamp. Let's treat people as intelligent grown ups
> > instead of children who need strict rules.
> > >
> > >On 31 January 2024 09:37:50 GMT, Pankaj Koti <pankaj.k...@astronomer.io
> .INVALID>
> > wrote:
> > >>+1 to keep this
> > >>
> > >>@Bolke de Bruin: I am just thinking more on your point and wondering
> > >>that if someone has the intent to hide the conversation, they can
> anyway
> > >>mark it as resolved irrespective of this configuration, no?
> >
>
--
--
Bolke de Bruin
bdbr...@gmail.com
