yeah, I thought they were going to provide some sort of rationale as to why they've never implemented this. instead this post just basically goes "yeah, you guys have been asking for this feature for 10 years, and... it's a good idea! let's do it."
Advise from low-quality bootcamp-like training programs that encourage open-source contribution, providing low-quality examples of such contribution, in order to improve one's resume and career chances.
They need to talk about how the pr itself should change. The text diff just is not the right thing to center. We should be using ai to chunk changes into reviewable bytes and to align on semantics and contracts.
It's a founded move. GitHub is code hosting platform, so there are both grounds and needs for read-only repos without PRs.
About time. It's absolutely ridiculous that this hasn't existed for the past 10 years.
yeah, I thought they were going to provide some sort of rationale as to why they've never implemented this. instead this post just basically goes "yeah, you guys have been asking for this feature for 10 years, and... it's a good idea! let's do it."
Exactly. Yes, please.
Just make the repo private?
"I am fine with my code being public, but I am not fine being badgered by people about changes I have no interest in." is a perfectly valid stance.
That doesn't work. What if your repo is a mirror of another repo?
I can imagine a few maintainers might appreciate that ability (https://github.com/expressjs/express/pulls?q=is%3Apr%20is%3A...).
Wow, what is the context for all of these spam PRs?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFkeOBqfQBw
Advise from low-quality bootcamp-like training programs that encourage open-source contribution, providing low-quality examples of such contribution, in order to improve one's resume and career chances.
They need to talk about how the pr itself should change. The text diff just is not the right thing to center. We should be using ai to chunk changes into reviewable bytes and to align on semantics and contracts.