From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on gnuweeb.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,NO_DNS_FOR_FROM, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from [192.168.230.80] (unknown [182.2.72.138]) by gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B739E8057F; Sat, 3 Sep 2022 09:58:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org; s=default; t=1662199133; bh=SBDrmstxRYT/bAhCoA+MAn3+aCF5OI8lEOzb+pou08M=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=Co6eslJsMr4yygA6rOgEUsIY3+RP2tKkkuH9xX644jE5zQUvR0MOn8xceRVbmcmOE GTtlaLE69mYTZHh4HBKfbrUmwVoD8BwwaIYJF5lnmQxh9EiCVGlC4FvuOwbqyUx92h TvElSx0P2kEskD8AdVGVRw4n8X3NbIKD0fPhcTKxIcY7x5q0F00guM6Seml4gkbtr0 t4LwBehZWwW4gfZHjJ0ayD9/G/mhj3i1ns99bPGHE3tcqzeZhZg5C3pERMC1EmdpM8 AO32Q5HWzWSmaLcrKBEL/nBj4yUHUJfC4z1xrRNw9rWRuKNEYKPj7YhdsLgCbDA6De AG8+dal80pdZw== Message-ID: <51f80c60-d2a6-2b41-f27a-f75cd212a1f7@gnuweeb.org> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 16:58:49 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] New Discord bot and full refactor scripts Content-Language: en-US To: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan Cc: Muhammad Rizki , GNU/Weeb Mailing List References: <20220827030236.1094-1-kiizuha@gnuweeb.org> From: Ammar Faizi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: On 9/3/22 4:56 PM, Alviro Iskandar Setiawan wrote: > On Sat, Sep 3, 2022 at 8:28 AM Ammar Faizi wrote: >> On 8/27/22 10:02 AM, Muhammad Rizki wrote: >>> Muhammad Rizki (3): >>> Move the Telegram bot source code >>> First release Discord bot >>> Full refactor bot scripts >> >> Please split these into smaller manageable-reviewable pieces. >> I simply can't review it. Each patch should only do one thing. > > you may want to impose stricter standards for this workflow, otherwise > it's not going to be productive, especially Rizki isn't that > experienced with this emailed patchset procedure. You should also > consider giving him a pay rise if you do more a complex workflow like > this We certainly can do that. But let's see how this is going to be done in the next revision. If it's starting to get better, I will reconsider. -- Ammar Faizi