The proposal sounds good to me, I really don't think the details matter
that much here.
If someone is arguing the wording of the guidelines ("I waited two
mercurial days, it didn't specify in the guidelines.")
then something has gone wrong just as much as having broken them. Even if
we specified the
guidelines so well that no one could argue against their wording, we
wouldn't use the
guidelines as the justification for an action in the repository. If you
attempt to follow the guidelines
and make a mistake, or even follow them accurately but find out that by
no-ones fault someone
who should have been notified wasn't able to be you should work to find a
common
ground that doesn't just involve "too bad, I followed the rules."
There will be exceptions to these guidelines as well I'm sure, we just need
to be clear that if you are
violating these principles you have a very good reason for doing so.
For example for an immediate security purpose, just make sure you can
clearly articulate why that
merge needed to happen immediately and be prepared to defend it to the
community.
Need to open a duplicate of a pr that was already closed? I'm sure there
are situations in which you
might want to do so. You can do so, but you better have a reason that isn't
"I wanted a different outcome".
Did circumstances change? Has the project evolved in a different direction?
Someone left the project?
All of these could be valid reasons and I don't think we gain anything by
articulating everything.
The key principle here is to treat other contributors as collaborators and
I fully approve of that. I don't feel
strongly about encoding the rules in github itself.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:58 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
> > It's not a problem to have several people working on the same feature.
> >
> > By duplicate PRs, I mean that you open a PR, where you get comments,
> > changes requested, etc. Then, you close this PR to open a new one (on
> > the same topic). So, I mean by a single person. I'm more in favor of
> > refactoring an existing PR, instead of closing PR #1 to open PR #2
> > with the refactoring.
> > On some projects, I saw contributors closing the PR #1, creating PR #2
> > just to get approval and merge (loosing the discussion on #1).
> >
>
> Thanks for the clarification! I totally agree with this.
>
> Cheers,
> Dmitri.
>
