It's easy to focus on the darker turns that thread took, but it also led to a lot of good discussion.
It got work restarted on https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18517 and led to the following issues being filed: - https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21980 - https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21983 - https://github.com/golang/go/issues/22002 - https://github.com/golang/go/issues/22007 That may not have been the goal of the thread per se, but I'd still count them as a positive outcome. On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Henrik Johansson <dahankz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am sorry but this type of straw man is not what Nate and others are > arguing for. > Never has anyone suggested we sacrifice quality for quantity but rather that > more better than less to turn the old adage around. > > If code review can be done efficiently enough and by enough people then more > contributors is better. > I think a move like this would initially hurt the process but over time > improve it since more contributors would also lead to more reviewers. > > My 2¢ > > > sön 24 sep. 2017 kl 09:01 skrev Nigel Vickers <rhed...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, 21 September 2017 04:27:19 UTC+2, Nate Finch wrote: >>> >>> https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21956 >>> >>> Wherein I suggest that not using GitHub for PRs and Reviews for the Go >>> Project itself is hurting the language and the community. >> >> >> I have been lurking on this discussion until now. I do not "like" the >> nature or tone that this discussion has taken. I am not a contributor to Go >> but have experience with a large Open Source Project. I use Go daily. All >> Communities have problems attracting contributors, but the problem is not >> just "Quantity" it is also "Quality". PRs cannot be just accepted; they have >> to be "Reviewed". I think the "worst" case I have encountered involved 6 >> lines of PHP code that "ping ponged" 26 times before a "programmer with a >> bad case of agenda" accepted that his code wasn't doing what he thought. >> Reviewers' working in such environments are rare and their feelings on the >> matter must be respected. GitHubs' review procedure does not have the depth >> or history that is necessary. >> >> Suggestions that the "Leaders of the Project" are following some hidden >> "Google Agenda" is unacceptable. You should be taking the state of Githubs' >> review to GitHub and not proposing to "Hamstring" the Go reviewers. >> >> imho. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "golang-nuts" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
