upvote

points

by swiftcoder2 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby ckolkey1 hours ago|
next
[-]
I've gotta disagree with you here - it's not uncommon for me to be diving into a library I'm using at work, find a small issue or something that could be improved (measurably, not stylistically), and open a PR to fix it. No big rewrites or anything crazy, but it would definitely fit the definition of "drive by change" that _thus far_ has been welcomed.
reply
upvoteby duskdozer35 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
>find a small issue

>No big rewrites or anything crazy

I think those are the key points why they've been welcomed.

reply
upvoteby oytis2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
How to differentiate between a drive-by contribution and a first contribution from a potentially long-time contrubutor.

And I would say especially for operating systems if it gets any adoption irregular contributions are pretty legit. E.g. when someone wants just one specific piece of hardware supported that no one else has or needs without being employed by the vendor.

reply
upvoteby Muromec2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
This sounds complicated in theory, but it's easier in practice.

Potential long time contributor is somebody who was already asking annoying questions in the irc channel for a few months and helped with other stuff before shooting off th e PR. If the PR is the first time you hear from a person -- that's pretty drive-by ish.

reply
upvoteby DrewADesign2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Sounds like a better way to make sure you have to be part of a clique to get your changed reviewed. I’ve been a long-time bug fixer in a few projects over the years without participating in IRC. I like the software and want it you work, but have no interest in conversing about it at that level, especially when I was conversing about software constantly at work.

I always provided well-documented PRs with a narrow scope and an obvious purpose.

reply
upvoteby MadameMinty1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Why would I ask annoying questions when I can identify, reproduce, pinpoint the bug, locate it in code, and fix it? Doing it alone should make it clear I don't need to ask to understand it. And why would I be interested in small talk? Doubt many people are when they patch up their work tools. It's a dispassionate kind of kindness.

Not to mention LLMs can be annoying, too. Demand this, and you'll only be inviting bots to pester devs on IRC.

reply
upvoteby duskdozer37 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Because you may misinterpret the correct fix or not know that your implementation doesn't fit the project's plans. Worse if it's LLM-generated.
reply
upvoteby junon1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Hard disagree. Drive by's were the easiest to deal with, and the most welcome. Especially when the community tilted more to the side of non-amateurs and passionate people.
reply
upvoteby CorrectHorseBat2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I can understand drive-by features can be a net burden, but what is wrong with a drive-by bugfix?
reply
upvoteby pmarreck2 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
how in the heck do you disambiguate a first time long term contributor and a first time drive by contributor?
reply
upvoteby swiftcoder1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Mostly by whether they check in first to see if the fix is actually welcome?

Drive-by folks tend to blindly fix the issue they care about, without regard to how/whether it fits into the overall project direction

reply
upvoteby kpcyrd5 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Your open source experience is very different from my open source experience.
reply