[erlang-questions] On Pull Requests Comments

Peer Stritzinger peerst@REDACTED
Sat Nov 2 17:17:05 CET 2013

On 2013-10-22 13:18:27 +0000, Dave Cottlehuber said:
>> I agree with you that archiving can be a problem. I actually get all
>> PR's as mails. I think others can to by watching the PR's. That might
>> solve your problem.
>> I like others to weigh in too.
>> Are PR's as bad as Anthony points out? Should we kill it and use mails only?
>> // Björn-Egil
> Hi Björn-Egil, Anthony & all,
> Let's not paint this as an either-or choice. I think we can use both. 
> The Apache Software Foundation has already been down this path, for 
> projects like Cordova and CouchDB, successfully.
> TL;DR keep the PRs and forward all commentary to 
> erlang-bugs/patches/something-new and everybody should be happy.

+1 to that.  When all PR comments are archived in a mailinglist, the 
immutabilty, searchability by search engines and independence of 
GitHubs future moves is given.

> Here's my personal view;
> - It's great that Ericsson's OTP team are continually improving their 
> engagement with the community. You are doing fantastic work and it's 
> winning all the way down. \o/ more please!
> - submitting changes via PR instead of directly on the mailing list is 
> clean and tidy, with better visibility when viewed in context like a 
> diff or changed files view.
> - However, the comments & discussions within the github thread are 
> easily lost. For those who are not interested in subscribing to a full 
> erlang-questions/patches/bugs list, it's ideal for keeping up to date 
> on a fix that individual submitted.
> - Subscribing (watching) the whole repo could be a lot of unwanted noise.

+1 to all of that too.

> A+
> @dch
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list