| Maybe don't criticize without knowing the full situation, eh? Your uninformed, holier-than-thou attempt at dressing me down isn't particularly useful. Guy was a pain on the mailing list (and occasionally on IRC, too), nagging for code reviews and merges, against a team of part-time volunteers. He'd open many merge requests in a short time span, most of them changing a fair bit of code, some doing some mid-sized refactoring. Very rarely would he discuss his changes with the maintainers before making them. And when someone disagreed with his approach, he'd get testy and push his point of view harder. Not a team player, not someone I'd ever want to work with, whether on a volunteer open source project or in a professional paid work setting. > The appropriate response is a shrug and a "thanks". Not if the contributions (and interactions with the contributor) create a lot of make-work for the maintainers where the benefit is unclear or known to be fairly low. I'm certainly not going to thank someone for creating more work for me that doesn't need to be done. > If you have problems with his PRs go bring them up with him. The problems were mostly "this doesn't need to be done, and you're changing the code from something I already know to something I don't, and I'm the one who has to navigate and maintain it, so this will be a net negative to me". And yet... the MRs kept coming. I'm not going to claim the existing code is the best code in the world; some of my parts were written by me 15-20 years ago when I was fairly junior, and it could use some improvement. But going in and changing things without first talking to a maintainer is not the way to do it. Don't get me wrong, some MRs ended up getting merged. Some of the maintainers did think that some of them were useful. But it felt like sorting through all of it to figure out what was actually useful, was more effort than it was worth. |
> Maybe don't criticize without knowing the full situation, eh? Your uninformed, holier-than-thou attempt at dressing me down isn't particularly useful.
My key complaint, you'll note, is that you aren't providing any details of the full situation and those that you are providing are uncharitable takes. I mean, you're being nasty to the dude and your complaint seems to be he isn't a senior dev. Fair enough. If you only want to review PRs by senior devs, warn the fellow then block him [0]. Don't go with public shaming as a strategy; HN is a big forum forum, the dude isn't here and he's presumably working under his real name.
If you want to be mean because he's done something go ahead. But unless you're going to say he's actually done something bad, I'm going to note you're being mean without a complaint and that is poor form.
> And when someone disagreed with his approach, he'd get testy and push his point of view harder.
I can't pass that by without noting some irony, given the comment it is in context of.
Software devs are known for this.
[0] I speak loosely. Mr Lots of PRs could be anyone for all I know.