| 1 |
On 11/03/2016 03:16 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hey guys, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Every other day on IRC, I see people arguing about touching each |
| 5 |
> others packages, despite our policies against it. (Sometimes it's even |
| 6 |
> me who's doing the touching!) My instinctive reaction is always, |
| 7 |
> "can't everybody calm down and be happy somebody is doing your work |
| 8 |
> for you?" The answer to this question is, of course, that it depends |
| 9 |
> who the developer is and how competent you are. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> So, nothing new here. I don't want to bikeshed about it. Business as usual. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Perhaps we can come up with something more formal for solving this, |
| 14 |
> that works a bit better than my package-policy.txt idea (see other |
| 15 |
> thread). |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> A few have proposed in the past adding this kind of "attitude |
| 18 |
> information" to metadata.xml. Does anybody have any concrete proposals |
| 19 |
> for what this would look like? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I must have missed the latest IRC conversation on this. Was the issue |
| 22 |
really about someone else doing the work or was it about someone |
| 23 |
committing changes without informing the actual maintainer(s) first? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If it's the first, there's no issue and nothing needs to be done in my |
| 26 |
opinion (well maybe the maintainer(s) should take note and solve the |
| 27 |
issue(s) faster next time). If it's the latter, then I think a much |
| 28 |
easier solution would be to file a PR, write a bug, or send an email |
| 29 |
before committing the change. None of those options are particularly |
| 30 |
difficult to do and it keeps the maintainer in the loop. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Just doing that one little thing would have prevented or shutdown the |
| 33 |
arguments I have seen. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks, |
| 36 |
Nicholas Vinson |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> Thanks, |
| 40 |
> Jason |
| 41 |
> |
Archives