Disclaimer: I don’t like the overhead of the merge request workflow, but I’m OK with following it if some contributor really wants to use it. Le Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:07:02AM -0700, Otto Kekäläinen a écrit : > It is demotivating to new > aspiring Debian contributors to put in significant effort to learn the > complexities of Debian packaging and submit an improvement, only to > see that the maintainer two months later didn't look at the MR at all, > (…) I see a discrepancy here between "to put in significant effort to learn the complexities of Debian packaging" and the fact they did not get in touch with the package maintainer. Silently opening a merge request on Salsa is *not* getting in touch. I for one only take into consideration contributions by people who actually talk to me about said contributions. Code dump through Salsa do not interest me in the slightest, and no amount of automatic notifications is going to change that for me (I would actually block such notifications). To avoid confusion: I’m perfectly happy with Salsa being used as a way to send patches, even as a merge request if it is what the contributor would use (I would have been OK with a repo URL + branch name). But the patches are only part of a contribution, and patches without communication are not going to be included in any of the packages I maintain.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature