[Geany-Devel] Zombified pull requests

[Lex Trotman]

[...]
>
> I'm afraid I won't remember all those acronyms :-). Maybe just using plain
> speech is fine.
>

Yes, as I said in another post:

> Just say it in plain old English :) "I (do/do not) like the idea, I
> (have/have not) reviewed the implementation and I (have/have not)
> tested it on (win/lin/both)."  Thats not a committer/dev prerogative,
> anybody can comment.

Any code or symbol is going to be misunderstood, thumbs up and LGTM
mean "good to commit" in other places, we shouldn't use them with some
limited meaning that other people don't know.

[...]
>
> I don't think we significantly disagree - as I said, I don't want master to
> become unusable either. I just think the bar might be lowered slightly.
>

Yes, it is always going to be a judgement call, being willing to
quickly revert commits that break stuff, with no negative implications
about the committer would help.  I can't think of a single instance
where we have reverted a commit (I'm sure Git knows).

Big commits that fail in an environment the developer and committer
don't have, (eg win/osx) and need testing by others, could be
committed to a branch after reverting them so the person who found the
breakage can test them easily and fixup commits made.

Cheers
Lex