4 ms·
> I really do not understand how anyone could just go from zero to PR without talking to a maintainer first about what they want to do, and how they want to do
by GrantMoyer 2y ago
> I really do not understand how anyone could just go from zero to PR without talking to a maintainer first about what they want to do, and how they want to do it.
I usually open a PR with at least a proof of concept implementation without prior discussion. I find that trying to discus a new feature without a concrete thing to look at often goes nowhere or even goes completely unanswered. On the other hand, with a concrete implementation to point at it's much easier to discuss direction and details and have everyone on the same page instead of talking past each other. But I realize the maintainer's vision may not align with my ideas, so I'm okay with them saying "no, we don't want this" and closing the PR outright.
- almostgotcaught 2y ago> I usually open a PR with at least a proof of concept implementation without prior discussion. I find that trying to discus a new feature without a concrete thing to look at often goes nowhere or even goes completely unanswered. You should do both: get a soft ok that they'll consider the change ("If I put up a PR/POC will you be able to take a look? Will you be able to approve? If not you then who would I reach out to?") and then put up the PR so there are concrete things to discuss. This saves you time because why put together even a POC if they're never gonna approve it.
- exe34 2y agoI feel like you, and in another environment entirely, I found it's useful to make the working implementation in secret, and open the ticket as if it's a new idea and steer the conversation towards your implementation. People like to feel like things are their ideas, so if you can guide them suggest the idea to you, it'll definitely get accepted. Personally I don't bother contributing unless I'm getting paid - otherwise I have no incentive to deal with the people bs.