You know why I like @forgejo so much? I just did a "fly-by" patch on the documentation because I was annoyed with how complicated that one page was written. So I forked the repo, cleaned up that page and submitted a Pull Request. And guess what? No discussions, no back and forth, it just got merged! Now THAT is how you attract new contributors to your Open Source project. Thank you! My first contribution!
The issue template system in #Forgejo is really powerful, BTW. Here's an example of a yaml issue template[1] and the resulting issue[2]. It sets labels, the branch and adds a nice checklist after you submit the issue. So cool. Oh, and you also get nice looking emails when you create an issue :)
(please don't file test issues in my repo behind those links ;)
@doomsdayrs Mostly ego, IMHO. Maintainers (sub)consciously using their commit power to exert control.
Sure, sometimes a pull request is unacceptable and needs work. Sometimes someone just wants to troll and provoke with a bad PR. But when you welcome new contributors and offer implicit trust, like forgejo does, it makes all the difference :) @forgejo
I feel like excellent research can be made on this topic, "Territorial Defense in Source Code Maintainership".
(Similar research: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786718).
He explains the difference between Pessimistic Merging (all patches considered evil until proven good) and Optimistic Merging (merge fast and fix even faster)
@doomsdayrs One of his arguments is that when you merge trollish and bad PRs, the name of the offender is in the history of the project. That's something the bad apples really don't like ;) @forgejo
@doomsdayrs@jwildeboer@forgejo Because people have different ideas about how things should look and if you want to have somewhat coherent code/docs, not every other person can write a different style, tone and structure.
Add comment