4 ms·

If someone either willfully or through purposeful negligence both doesn’t read a README or PR template that outline PRs aren’t welcome and submits a PR hoping a

If someone either willfully or through purposeful negligence both doesn’t read a README or PR template that outline PRs aren’t welcome and submits a PR hoping against hope for a different outcome, I think we can assume that absolutely nothing will prevent them from having their hopes crushed. I don’t think optimizing for that edge case makes a ton of sense. Having the ability to hide PRs might be a nice feature, but some people use that for stuff other than straight pull requests.

TheRealPomax 6y ago
Then maybe those folks should get a better feature for that, too. More than one thing can be suboptimal about the same feature-as-implemented.
- filmgirlcw 6y ago
  Totally valid, and I'm not opposed to an option to turn it off, I was just saying I can understand why some people might need to keep it on, even if they do have a README and PR template that makes it clear they don't accept PRs. I just think the "crushing the hopes of people that don't read" aspect is probably the lowest priority in that sort of situation.
  - cutemonster 6y ago
    That's not the only thing. A few of those who didn't read the README, and get their PRs auto closed, might get upset at the maintainers, and write something a bit angry, making it less pleasant to be a maintainer.
kelnos 6y ago
It's not just about that, though. I want to avoid crushing people's hopes, yes, but in the event that they are absolutely set on submitting a PR, I don't want to have to deal with getting a notification and having to manually close it. (And no, I don't want to take the time to set up a bot to do it either. I have better things to do with my time.)
- filmgirlcw 6y ago
  I mean, I get that, and I'm not opposed to having a method to turn off PRs. I'm just saying that if the impetus is avoiding crushing people's hopes because a README and template isn't clear enough, I think there are people that will still create an issue or send an email about why they can't submit a PR.

TheRealPomax 6y ago

Then maybe those folks should get a better feature for that, too. More than one thing can be suboptimal about the same feature-as-implemented.

filmgirlcw 6y ago
Totally valid, and I'm not opposed to an option to turn it off, I was just saying I can understand why some people might need to keep it on, even if they do have a README and PR template that makes it clear they don't accept PRs. I just think the "crushing the hopes of people that don't read" aspect is probably the lowest priority in that sort of situation.
- cutemonster 6y ago
  That's not the only thing. A few of those who didn't read the README, and get their PRs auto closed, might get upset at the maintainers, and write something a bit angry, making it less pleasant to be a maintainer.

kelnos 6y ago

It's not just about that, though. I want to avoid crushing people's hopes, yes, but in the event that they are absolutely set on submitting a PR, I don't want to have to deal with getting a notification and having to manually close it. (And no, I don't want to take the time to set up a bot to do it either. I have better things to do with my time.)

filmgirlcw 6y ago
I mean, I get that, and I'm not opposed to having a method to turn off PRs. I'm just saying that if the impetus is avoiding crushing people's hopes because a README and template isn't clear enough, I think there are people that will still create an issue or send an email about why they can't submit a PR.