two points

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 2/9/2017 8:55 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> 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. :-(

That certainly does happen, but it isn't quite the case with Nick's PRs.


> 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.

There's a lot going on needing attention, and sometimes a bit of championing is 
needed by their proponents.

Also, please keep in mind that the smaller and more focussed a PR is, the more 
likely it'll have a quick resolution.