Subject: Re: [boost] Lack of response to pull requests [resend]
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-13 10:48:45
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> IMO it should be a Boost policy that anyone who submits a pull request
> deserves a response within a reasonable period of time.
>
> *What is a "response"?*
>
> GitHub pull requests have a "Comment" mechanism, so that's the best
> mechanism as it ensures reaching the submitter even they don't read the
> developer list. We also need to delineate some common responses, but that
> can wait until the overall policy is agreed upon.
>
> *What is a "reasonable period of time"?*
>
> This may be a bit of a bike shed discussion since whatever we start with
> may need adjustment based on experience. Would two weeks be a good starting
> point?
Sounds ok.
> *Who should step in if there is no response from the library maintainer?*
>
> The Community Maintenance Team IMO is the logical choice. A pull request
> that does not receive a timely response may be an early warning sign that
> the library involved does not have an active maintainer. The CMT folks are
> interested maintenance and already have processes to review pull requests.
> This would be an expansion of their mandate, and details need to be worked
> out such as what happens if the library maintainer is just busy at the
> moment.
This implies that CMT has full access to all libraries, right?
> *What should the pull submitter do if there is no response within the
> reasonable period of time?*
> Send an email to the CMT pointing to the open pull request.
>
> (It would be nice if the submitter didn't have to do anything, but that
> implies the ability to monitor open pull requests. See "[GitHub] List open
> pull requests for all libraries?")
>
> Comments?
I think this is a good idea. I also would extend the policy to Trac
tickets as well since we still use them (and for some libraries they
are the primary feedback system).