[Reviewers] What to do with mpm/flow?

[Augie Fackler]

> On Dec 26, 2017, at 4:10 PM, Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com <mailto:raf at durin42.com>> wrote:
> A friend on freenode (bcc’ed) whispered me and mentioned that https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/mpm/flow <https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/mpm/flow> looks pretty lousy. It’s also super out of date. Anyone got ideas beyond just emptying the page out or hitting it with a “historical interest” flag?
> 
> I know in general that flow control is still a little bit of a problem, but the BDFL “slow down or else” attitude is remarkably unwelcoming…
> 
> Yes, we should throw a giant "this is historical" banner on the page.

I’ve added <<Include(A:historic)>> to both that and the goaltender page.

> 
> We should also not discourage people from sending patches - even if there is a large backlog. If a new contributor is willing to make a contribution, the barrier should be as low as possible. This includes not having to check for in-flight reviews.

Agreed, though it might be nice advice to suggest people do a slow-start on anything but the most trivial patch series?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-reviewers/attachments/20171227/df8c4c94/attachment-0002.html>