[Nix-dev] On commit naming conventions

[zimbatm]

This paragraph in the article sums the problem pretty much:

> What’s even more frustrating is that even though Jane provides feedback
quickly, often contributors lose interest and/or forget about taking their
Pull Requests the final step after initially contributing them. The
apparent triviality of the changes Jane’s asking for (somewhat perversely)
contributes to that loss of interest, since it just feels like nit-picking
when she’s asking for the fifth overlooked stylistic change.

Especially if the only motivation is to keep the git history pretty, it
doesn't play any functional role. I agree that the person merging could
also amend the commits but then it just shifts the burden to this group of
people. Wouldn't we rather move forward and get even more code merged ?

On Wed, 4 May 2016 at 13:09 Graham Christensen <graham at grahamc.com> wrote:

> I've found this post insightful (disregard the title) about how to not be
> too much of a stickler with new committers:
> https://blog.spreedly.com/2014/06/24/merge-pull-request-considered-harmful/
>
> Graham
>
> > On May 4, 2016, at 6:26 AM, zimbatm <zimbatm at zimbatm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Each contributor has his own motivations and every round were we provide
> feedback is another one where we might lose the contributor. He might run
> out of energy, or have moved onto other things.
> >
> > Even after improving the CONTRIBUTING.md, naming of commits is still a
> really big friction to getting valid code into nixpkgs. I'm talking of how
> commits should be named after a patter like "package: init at x.y.z" or
> "package: a.b.c -> x.y.z".
> >
> > I must admit I don't really know the motivations behind this rule. All I
> can think of it that we could theoretically build some tooling and get
> pretty cool stats out of it. And that spelunking git history becomes a tiny
> bit easier.
> >
> > Given all that I think we should reconsider that rule. In my opinion if
> a contributor submits valid nix code that is useful to the project we
> should just be able to merge it and move forward. For me it's more
> important than the commit naming rule.
> >
> > Opinions ?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nix-dev mailing list
> > nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20160505/ea8f879d/attachment-0001.html