> On Nov 20, 2015, at 1:16 AM, Ian Wootten <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> With regard to 2), I would guess that githubs angle might be that it's the 
> responsibility of the PR author to make such changes. On my last team, we'd 
> review PR's, offer up feedback and the author of the PR would clean it up.

We do that, too, but I wasn't really referring to people failing to adhere to 
some style rule that can easily be kicked back with explanation.

As an example, somebody may add an API call to the C++ but not realize that 
something needs to change to make it reflected in the Python bindings. And if 
they did know it, they might not know how to do it, and don't have the time to 
invest in reading the awful Boost Python docs to figure it out, when I or 
somebody else already knows exactly what to do. It took me a long period of 
serious immersion in the Boost Python code to really grok what what going on 
and get to the point where I know exactly what to do to add something small 
there. I know that only a few OIIO contributors know that corner of the code, 
and that's ok -- I can't reasonably expect that level of familiarity with it to 
be the prerequisite to making any change to the codebase.

Sometimes I handle this by merging what they have, and doing the amendments on 
top of it (without squashing them together) or simply as a separate PR as 
follow-on. But it would often be handy to be able to directly amend it to the 
same checkin and keep all the discussion together rather than spread over 
multiple tickets.

It seems reasonable to allow others (or maybe just project admins) who are not 
the original authors of the PR, to be able to append to it on the same ticket. 
Or some way of "rebasing" the ticket and its discussion onto a different 
person's repo or a different branch. 

--
Larry Gritz
[email protected]


_______________________________________________
Oiio-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org

Reply via email to