Open-source, not open-contribution

Re:Open-source, not open-contribution by gus_massa on Thursday January 28, 2021 @08:16AM (#25941334)

I agree, but I'd make an exception for fixing typos, obvious bugs and tiny additional features. Sometimes the change takes less time that discussing in other channels, and sometimes it's easier to explain with code if you are not a native speaker.

I think that spending more of a weekend in a PR without checking before with the maintainers is a bad idea, because there is a big risk that is not merged and is a waste of time.

Also, each project has it's own weird rules, like code style, space vs tabs, changing whitespace in unrelated lines, adding tests, ... and a long list. Some are written explicitly, and some are just implicit rules. So sometimes it's difficult to make a PR that follows all the rules.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Open-source, not open-contribution by Communitivity on Thursday January 28, 2021 @09:44AM (#25942429)

100% agreed. Things that are obvious to fix and have no design impact should be ok to PR and get accepted quickly.

Every rule has exceptions, and this is definitely one for the rule I described. Thank you for pointing reminding me and clarifying.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Open-source, not open-contribution by phkahler on Thursday January 28, 2021 @11:56AM (#25944795)

Yep. We had a PR for a single character typo. The submitter went to a lot of trouble, but the burden to the project really was as small as could be. No discussion, no open issue, just a PR with a one liner that could be reviewed in seconds and accepted with a click. Any other process would have been more work for the maintainers.

[ Parent | on HN ]