[ANN] Release 9.6.0 DP-1
mark at livecode.com
Tue Nov 26 20:56:59 EST 2019
I suspect most people would prefer and be more satisfied with a situation where the things which were merged were of appropriate quality, traceable, documented, not break anything and were reasonably certain to not cause difficulties in the future. (The latter two criteria are hard to meet, but at least achieving the previous three helps mitigate that fact).
As with most cases of quoting numbers without any due diligence, analysis or context (as is the case in the original post) - one would be wise to not infer anything from it as numbers quoted in such a fashion are essentially meaningless (42, anyone?).
All of us try things, whether it be adding features, fixing bugs or just experiments in our code - the results of which never see the light of day. In my team’s case we have the tendency to push whatever we do publicly as a branch / PR as a matter of habit (although perhaps I should re-evaluate as to whether it is a good habit or not!)
If we did not have that policy and instead we pushed nothing publicly until it was going to be merged (which does not appear to be an uncommon phenomenon looking askance at quite a few other large projects lurking out there); then you’d probably find the number of open PRs at any one time would probably be countable on your digits.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 26 Nov 2019, at 20:50, Richmond via use-livecode <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> I think I understand what "no longer relevant" means,
> but "stale" is unclear to me; I've always thought of something
> that has gone stale as something that someone
> should have done something with earlier but somehow 'overlooked.'
> And, as to "not going to get merged," well, why isn't that feature going to get
> merged? I wonder how many people are going to feel completely satisfied by
> either that classification or "stale" ?
>> On 26.11.19 22:44, hh via use-livecode wrote:
>> @Mark Waddingham.
>> Good to know you are still alive.
>> LC version numbering has it's own logic, agreed -- as long as
>> it's counting up. Integers are meek as a lamb, we have enough
>> of them.
>> Nevertheless Mark Wieder made a good point with looking at the
>> pull requests.
>> If I understand correctly then you both are right:
>> At the very end it is the content that matters.
>> Now we all look forward to know which pull requests are *NOT*
>> "incomplete or WIP" and which are *NOT* "stale / no longer
>> relevant / not going to get merged".
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode