3 ms·
Why? I don't appreciate comments that cast doubt on decent technical contributors without any substance to back it up. It's a cheap shot from anonymity.
by BowBun 8mo ago
Why? I don't appreciate comments that cast doubt on decent technical contributors without any substance to back it up. It's a cheap shot from anonymity.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 8mo agoI'm not the parent but if you know you want to merge a PR "within a few seconds" then you're likely to be merging in bad changes. If you had left it at know you want to reject a PR within a few seconds, that'd be fine. Although with safety critical systems I'd probably want each contributor to have some experience in the field too.
- colinmcdermott 8mo agoSounds like you misunderstood. They didn't say they are merging PRs after a few seconds. Just that the difference between a good one and a bad is often obvious after a few seconds. Edit: typos
- adeebshihadeh 8mo agoExactly, every PR starts with: 1. What’s the goal of this PR and how does it further our project’s goals? 2. Is this vaguely the correct implementation? Evaluating those two takes a few seconds. Beyond that, yes it takes a while to review and merge even a few line diff.
- stavros 8mo agoI'm not sure there are many ways to interpret "I know whether I want to merge a PR within a few seconds".
- jeremyjh 8mo agoYet I also agree with GP.
- theshrike79 8mo ago"*WANT* to close or *WANT* to merge". Not WILL close or WILL merge. You look at the PR and you know just by looking at it for a few seconds if it looks off or not. Looks off -> "Want to close" Write a polite response and close the issue. Doesn't look off -> "Want to merge" If we want to merge it, then of course you look at it more closely. Or label it and move on with the triage.