I’m not disputing the great effort put into this. My dispute is that it should be under the openssl list command…..
I agree, this shouldn’t have been a “good first issue”. Pauli -- Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations Phone +61 7 3031 7217 Oracle Australia > On 17 Sep 2019, at 3:49 pm, Richard Levitte <[email protected]> wrote: > > ... or how our usual style of dispute can sometimes deter help from > the community. > > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9912 > > In this PR, there's a lot of discussions going on, a bit back an > forth, about the right way to do things, and what does what like what > other thing and so on. > > This is often our modus operandi, and it has often given us pretty > good quality code (or at least, so we hope), even though it can be a > bit exhausting at times. > > I would like to emphasise that I think this is absolutely fine... > when it's among us who have been along for a bit, perhaps have come to > know each other a bit more and have some kind of sense of our > respective strengths and weaknesses, or even with someone that has > shown they can handle this type of discussion. > > However, in pull requests like the one cited, where the associated > issue is marked "good first issue", and the author has done quite well > what was asked from the issue, it can be quite unexpected, not to say > overwhelming to be met with this discussion style that could be seen > as getting out of proportion. A "good first issue" is supposed to be > a bite size thing after all, and I fear that if this is how we welcome > new contributors, they might more often than not choose to step away > from it all. > > So maybe let's be a little more careful with contributions for "good > first issue" and potential newcomers, yeah? > > Cheers, > Richard > > -- > Richard Levitte [email protected] > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
