Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:36:26 +0000 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bart=C5=82omiej_Rutkowski?= <robak@freebsd.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: git@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pull requests Message-ID: <CAGFrfxZRUWryg8nHQ2gGbrcZ1U1EgsaSVfpn_mgortmih99fAQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfoT%2B9nHqS2qYuf_-sBAYDAzH=2ePW=ADPwGhjUG00S2Jw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANCZdfoT%2B9nHqS2qYuf_-sBAYDAzH=2ePW=ADPwGhjUG00S2Jw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > So, policy on github pull requests. > > Do we have one? > > If not, I'm going to set a sensible one and publish. Or set one and > get you folks to review. I'd like to see us down to 0 open pull > requests by the end of March. > > Warner > What kind of policy, regarding what and 'policing' what and how exactly? Who and how will enforce such policy and on whom? In the end, "we can't force anyone to do anything" so unless we commit to do something on GitHub, I'd see it as a dead law. Not to mention I've got a feeling this is completely disconnected from the general direction that I think has been 'agreed', that is we'll have a software solution getting GH PR's into Phabric reviews and GH Issues into Bugzilla PR's automatically. What then, shouldn't it be more like Phabric reviews/Bugzilla PR policy instead? Kind regards, Bartek Rutkowski
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFrfxZRUWryg8nHQ2gGbrcZ1U1EgsaSVfpn_mgortmih99fAQ>