> I am pro resolving
the 1:1 relation between PRs and issues
dissolving*
Am Mi., 22. Jan. 2025 um 00:02 Uhr schrieb Jacob Wujciak
:
>
> Thanks for restarting this discussion. In general I am pro resolving
> the 1:1 relation between PRs and issues. At the moment I don't have a
> firm view on what
Thanks for restarting this discussion. In general I am pro resolving
the 1:1 relation between PRs and issues. At the moment I don't have a
firm view on what should replace it as a source of truth for
changelogs etc.
Though I am leaning towards using PRs/commits for that with issues
just being used
I think we should allow multiple PRs for any issue in order to reduce
friction for contributors.
I remembered this thread while looking at the issue for Decimal32/64
support [1] which I think is a good example of where filing separate
issues for every patch doesn't add value and adds friction. Som
Hi all,
Thank you for raising this topic Joris. I do agree with what you propose as
I
frequently see separate but very much connected issues being opened in
PyArrow
just for the sake of having a 1-1 relationship (and I do the same) . I feel
it adds
to a huge number of issues unnecessarily and adds
Perhaps adding a count tag to the PR titles would be useful for such cases?
e.g.: GH-: [/]
Rok
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 10:37 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't have a specific opinion on this, but as a data point, this
> already happens from time to time (though rarely).
>
> Regards
Hi,
I don't have a specific opinion on this, but as a data point, this
already happens from time to time (though rarely).
Regards
Antoine.
Le 11/09/2024 à 17:32, Joris Van den Bossche a écrit :
Hi all,
This is a discussion specifically for the GitHub development workflow
we use in the m
