| 1 |
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:53 PM, james <garftd@×××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> The grandiose-ness you propose should only come upon graduating from proxy school, imho. |
| 3 |
> user-->strong-users-->proxy-->dev pathway. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Pedantic, bureaucratic, procedure-oriented, monolithic, restrictive. |
| 6 |
Too conservative. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
What matters is the contribution, and the result. If you don't like |
| 9 |
how a user makes a contribution, don't accept the pull request, or |
| 10 |
don't merge his package. Simple. If you think that could turn out to |
| 11 |
be just a waste of time for them, help them correct their issues; add |
| 12 |
some documentations to enlighten them and give warnings about wrong |
| 13 |
practices so they don't blame anyone, and so they can decide whether |
| 14 |
they would want to contribute or not given the rules presented; but, |
| 15 |
_don't_ make the steps mandatory. Don't make contributions |
| 16 |
restrictive. We do already allow people to send pull requests to |
| 17 |
Gentoo portage's repo in Github, but it seems like they generally only |
| 18 |
allow patches that fix current packages, not new features or new |
| 19 |
packages. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
That's the very reason why I didn't like becoming a dev. The system |
| 22 |
is too conservative and old-school for me. I avoid projects where |
| 23 |
collaboration is mandatory. I prefer contributing to a project with |
| 24 |
open and loosely knit arrangements, and a dynamic system. Rankings, |
| 25 |
team bonding mean nothing. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
--- |
| 28 |
konsolebox |
Archives