4 ms·
It takes time to validate a PR, to test it, to verify it. He is not being paid for his time, he does not owe -anyone- his time. If you don't like the way a pr
by virtue3 7y ago
It takes time to validate a PR, to test it, to verify it. He is not being paid for his time, he does not owe -anyone- his time.
If you don't like the way a project is being run, fork it and own it yourself.
I know that's harsh, and not idealistic, but it's the way people should really think about this. People take FOSS for granted, CONSTANTLY. And maintainers even more so.
- mratsim 7y agoThe PR contributor was not paid either to investigate the bug, reproduce it, write a patch and test it. However instead of raising a "don't work, please fix" bug s/he took the time to do all that. Anyone that went to such length deserve basic courtesy, whether the code is accepted or refused. Refusing a patch because it is "boring" is not respecting the time people dedicated to your project. I would understand refusing because the patch makes an unwanted compromise on performance and the maintainer considers performance regressions as bug.
- cerberusss 7y agoThese are merely your expectations, and this will probably disappoint you in the future. I have replied to logged issues with the question: "I don't work on this, unless you have set aside a budget that pays my hourly rate".
- jhall1468 7y agoAnd when maintainers respond to a significant amount of work involved in a PR for a bug with a note that they aren't interested because it's "boring" then they can be critiqued for being a jerk, because they decided to be a jerk. If the maintainer had said, "Hey, I don't have the time to review/test/verify this PR so I'm closing it for now," the backlash probably wouldn't have been quite so severe.