> or being overly conservative with feature/pull requests
We saw some complaints about a repo like this I forget for what project some weeks back here on HN and it came down to, people dropping a PR and then the maintainer left holding the bag if something goes wrong, having to maintain someone else's code, which can become a problem if its a completely new feature they didn't implement or want, but users wanted. The other case is, they fix a bug, then disappear, so if the maintainer has feedback, now they have to take time to check out the person's code, update it, out of their current planned work.
I wonder if more open source projects would benefit from adding plugin architecture so people can do those one-off features as plugins without "tainting" the core project.
We saw some complaints about a repo like this I forget for what project some weeks back here on HN and it came down to, people dropping a PR and then the maintainer left holding the bag if something goes wrong, having to maintain someone else's code, which can become a problem if its a completely new feature they didn't implement or want, but users wanted. The other case is, they fix a bug, then disappear, so if the maintainer has feedback, now they have to take time to check out the person's code, update it, out of their current planned work.
I wonder if more open source projects would benefit from adding plugin architecture so people can do those one-off features as plugins without "tainting" the core project.