Le Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 03:08:20AM +0530, Nilesh Patra a écrit : > Opening PRs/MRs are typically how most of the git forges are used for contributions. I have been using many of these forges for a decade and a half, I even self-hosted a GitLab instance for far too many years, and have been part of the Debian GitLab team bringing Debian stable users the ability to install GitLab through FatsTrack. So I know quite well how the PR/MR workflow works ;) > Having salsa and allowing to open MRs and then saying that you will accept a patch > only if you file a bug report via BTS with proper tags is somewhat an anti-pattern. > > Opening an MR here *is* a way to communicate with you. Mailing you separately is adding > another layer to that communication which I think I do not understand. Sending a mail/mentioning > on MR makes sense if it does not come into notice or the maintainer forgets about it. Opening an MR without having contacted me *prior to the fact* is the definition of a code dump. I do not care about code, I can very well write it myself in the first place. What I care about is people, especially people who want to fix or improve a package I am working on. But if they refuse to communicate and only want to interact by silently sending patches, we can not work together. If sending an e-mail is too much for them, well, too bad, they were not all that interested in improving the package in the first place to stop at such a trivial requirement. Maybe we need some debian/contributing file to make the contribution rules explictit? Or maybe this could be a pertinent (ab)use of debian/README.source? At least that way people who can’t stand the effort of sending an e-mail (or an IRC ping, or even a message on XMPP, I don’t care about the channel) prior to any kind of code contribution would know there is no use wasting their time on packages I maintain.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature