Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78551
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zort.net designates 96.241.205.2 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
In-Reply-To: <BC8401DB-143C-4E0A-AE0D-6153AB4F7424@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 15:02:11 -0400
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <3CF168DE-2E9B-45BE-96C3-2D59F130AC36@zort.net>
References: <EB032A39-EB24-4BBE-A2D3-14BF63809873@zort.net> <CAEZPtU6PA1=jNPcQB5n4m1gYvfxBh_5MsEPHmvD_gAS8hHDyWA@mail.gmail.com> <BC8401DB-143C-4E0A-AE0D-6153AB4F7424@gmail.com>
To: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] GitHub Pull Requests Triage Team
From: dshadow@zort.net (John Bafford)


On Nov 1, 2014, at 08:28, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1 November 2014 11:53:11 GMT, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>> Hi,
>>=20
>> On Oct 31, 2014 4:57 AM, "John Bafford" <jbafford@zort.net> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi,
>>>=20
>>> I would like to propose the creation of a team to triage the pull
>> requests on GitHub, to help ensure that the pull requests are handled
>> in a
>> timely manner. I am also volunteering to lead such a team, should the
>> RFC
>> be approved.
>>>=20
>>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/github-pr
>>>=20
>>> PHP=92s GitHub repository has over 180 open pull requests. Many of
>> these
>> are bug fixes or new tests that should be incorporated into PHP, but
>> have
>> not been because the PRs aren=92t being regularly monitored. As a =
result,
>> the
>> large number of open pull requests may also be discouraging
>> contributions,
>> as potential contributors may see that pull requests are not being
>> acted on
>> and decline to submit changes.
>>=20
>> As much as I like the idea I never understood why we do not have them
>> here.
>>=20
>> Given that many PRs have discussions, it should show up on internals.
>>=20
>> PS: yes we have a PR list. Which did not work as expected. PRs and
>> discussions in them should not be considered as noises to the =
internals
>> list
>=20
> It depends on the type of discussion - PR discussions can be an =
opportunity for code review and discussing the minutiae of the =
implementation, which don't really warrant forwarding to a wider =
audience. If the discussion becomes about the merit or impact of the =
change itself, then a discussion on Internals might make sense. The same =
is true of bug discussions; having every comment on every bug flood the =
list wouldn't make sense, but some should probably be forwarded here to =
get a wider audience.
>=20
> I don't know what the volume in this case would be, though. If there =
were several posts popping up on Internals every day about someone =
misplacing a curly brace, I would definitely think it was noise; if it =
were a few threads a week, mostly discussing the actual substance of =
changes, I'd be fine with it.

I would expect that, at the least, there would be an uptick in =
discussion just as a result of weekly PR summary making the pending PRs =
more visible. My guess is that there might be a lot of discussion and/or =
noise initially as we get the current backlog (185 PRs currently open) =
whittled down to something more manageable, so it might take a few =
months after the RFC is adopted for the true nature of the volume =
increase (if any) to become apparent.

-John=