Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I contribute to an open source project that actively solicits contributions. The README asks for PRs in preference to issues (but issues are okay), and there is even a CONTIBUTING.md that describes the process.

After being active on the project for a while I was granted commit rights. I have done everything I can in that role to support the project - responding to issues, merging other's PRs after code review & testing, updating documentation, and, in response to issues creating PRs that are: coded in the same (slightly idiosyncratic) style as the original code, don't cause regressions, have their own tests, and are well documented.

In the interest of good practice I haven't merge my own PRs, but left them to the project owner to review. There they languish despite in some cases resolving issues that the project owner himself opened issues for.

So, while I don't agree with the tone, I do sympathise with the author's position. It can be demoralizing when an open-source project owner actively solicits contributions (not just a fork or create PR button, but requests and instructions), then ignores contributions that may have taken many hours (or in some cases days) to get to the point where the PR is submitted.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: