Re: Cc'ing the Git maintainer on GitGitGadget contributions, was Re: [PATCH 0/1] add--interactive: skip index refresh in reset patch mode

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 8, 2021, 19:48 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq8s93i506.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2101081534380.2213@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> But I don't see how that would make this process more inviting to new
> contributors.

Appearing to be inviting should not be our primary goal.

Instead, the goal should be to make it easier to contribute quality patches. By doing so, the smooth experience may attract more new people, which may end up to be "inviting" in the end, but that is as a side effect.

> BTW I get the sense that many Git mailing list regulars have this idea
> that making the review process easier for one-time contributors would
> invite too many low-quality contributions.

I don't get such a sense at all.

Sure, if GGG or any other mechanism encourages spamming the list with low-quality patches, that may harm our productivity, but that is not what we are doing. And I do not see how it can be a source of low-quality contributions to send patches that by default do not CC them to random people when the sender does not know when it is appropriate to do so. Sure, if the patches asked for attention from appropriate reviewers (the maintainer included), it might get more responses, but we more often review patches that are only sent to the list than those that are sent directly to us via Cc _anyway_.

On the other hand, inviting more new people to CC reviewers whose mailboxes are already full when the patches are not yet ready would harm productivity of recipients of such patches.

One attribute of a quality patch is that it is CC'ed to the right people and at the right time.