Yes between each other but the scrutiny is mostly applied to non team member contribs too, we are just a tad nicer :) interestingly in search and OGM, I don't think we had much small PRs from the community, it was almost always big protein packed feature requests.
On 9 juil. 2013, at 22:53, Hardy Ferentschik <ha...@hibernate.org> wrote: > I guess we have been talking up requests from within the team. At least I > have. IMO they are generally a different beast with other things to consider. > > --hardy > > > On 9 Jul 2013, at 22:48, Steve Ebersole <steven.ebers...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am curious if y'all are talking about all pull requests, whether that be >> from community members as well as those from within the team? >> >> On Tue 09 Jul 2013 02:39:12 PM CDT, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: >>> I basically like what I hear. Some wise words :-) >>> >>> On 9 Jan 2013, at 9:00 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <emman...@hibernate.org> wrote: >>> >>>> There has been a tendency to let PR sit a bit longer than it should as >>>> we all try to get our stuff done before diving into other's PRs. >>>> I have been particularly guilty and Hibernate OGM is a particularly bad >>>> example. I did not see too much lagging PRs on other projects >>> >>> Right. I feel Search for example is working quite well. >>> >>>> Should we have a team member on watch whose priority for a week is >>>> addressing pull requests? >>> >>> Not sure. The idea has some merits, but I am not sure that it is necessary. >>> >>>> I also think opening issues to things that are not fully on the topic is >>>> a good strategy to keep the cycle on a given PR short. >>> >>> What is the definition of not fully on topic. I would not suggest a change >>> in >>> class X for a pull request where only class Y and Z are affected. However, >>> if class X is touched and I see a potential improvement I think it can be >>> considered >>> being part of the topic. Boy Scout rule number one:" Always leave the >>> campground >>> cleaner than you found it." I truly believe in this one, but of course >>> sometimes a >>> potential improvement would have too big of a ripple effect to be pursued. >>> >>>> That does not >>>> mean one won't work directly on these after the PR is done >>> >>> Here we have to disagree. Unless you do it here and now the chances are slim >>> you are following up. >>> >>>> About the preview, I have to disagree with Sanne and Hardy, I do like >>>> them and find them to be the least worse tool to show a preview and get >>>> feedback. I'm sorry but I have done it many times on JIRA and via emails >>>> and the feedback is not the same by far. >>> >>> My experience with asking for feedback on my feature branches is actually >>> quite good. Kudos to Gunnar and Sanne on their helps. I guess if I felt I >>> would be >>> left hanging on this type of feedback, I would create these "preview" pull >>> requests >>> as well. >>> >>>> Like many rules, they are meant to be broken and good judgement is highly >>>> preferable >>> >>> That's the part I like best. >>> +100 >>> >>> --Hardy >>> _______________________________________________ >>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
