4 ms·
Do you then fix the typo with no attribution to the original reporter? Or do you just choose not to fix a known error because you question the motives of the re
by tompt 3y ago
Do you then fix the typo with no attribution to the original reporter? Or do you just choose not to fix a known error because you question the motives of the reporter?
- sieabahlpark 3y ago[dead]
- arp242 3y agoUsually this is stuff like fixing "// TODO: this fails reguarly in the CI" (real example from the last such PR). It's the kind of thing I'll fix if I see it, but not really worth going out of my way fixing something like that: it's just a comment in some test code (not user-facing) and the few people that will ever see that comment understand "reguarly" as well. It's a non-issue and basically just spam IMHO. These are always either bots or people looking to bolster their CV by bragging they "contributed" n PRs to n repos. I signed up to collaboratively make some (hopefully nice) software, not to deal with a stream of PRs like this. Typos in README or publicly facing docs are different; I usually merge those (and those are almost always good faith too, because usually a real human picks up on them before the bots/script kiddies do).