The DIP Process

[Donald]

On Tuesday, 26 February 2019 at 22:16:09 UTC, Manu wrote:
> ...
> TL;DR, true feedback was that I needed to do one legit 
> self-contained
> fix to the rewrite syntax to support exceptions (I made a PR 
> for that
> correction), and a *one word* (a trivial variable name) 
> amendment to
> have the thing re-read correctly, and I'm not satisfied that I 
> should
> have to restart the process on that matter.
> It would take me *seconds* to fix and resubmit, but I'm a salty
> arsehole, and I'm disenfranchised by the process and stubborn
> insistence that because I chose a poor variable name that all 
> my work
> was rubbish and I should start over.

Sorry but I don't buy it. I mean if it would be so simple as you 
say, like in matter of seconds to fix it, why not just do it?

So you decided that because the way the process is you shouldn't 
do it?

It think that was a huge mistake of your part. You should have 
made all the fixes and proposed it again, just to see the 
aftermath.

Doing this in my opinion would be the way to adjust the process, 
not just give up.

Donald.