two points

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 9 February 2017 at 09:49:53 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> In any case, shouldn't it be an uphill battle to merge things? 
> There are a lot of things that need to be satisfied to merge 
> something. Being too hasty leads to legacy code that we come to 
> regret, angry people whose code was broken, and technical debt.

There's a difference between it being an uphill battle because 
review and feedback are careful, cautious, in-depth and strict 
(as they should be!), versus it being an uphill battle because no 
feedback or interest is being offered and PRs are left to bitrot. 
:-(

I accept that there are a lot of things that need to be satisfied 
to merge something.  Personally speaking, I'm willing to endure 
any number of rebases and conflict-fixes, so long as I'm getting 
feedback and engagement that allows my PR to become better code.  
It's when I'm _not_ getting any indicators as to what needs to be 
satisfied that things become problematic.