Internal rule: use PR instead of closing commits

[jandudulski]

When applying guide use pull-requests to allow others verify if everything is fine and applies discussed point of view.

/cc @sheerun @bartoszpietrzak @Ostrzy @porada @venticco @teamon @szajbus @chytreg @jcieslar

[teamon]

:+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1: :+1:

[sheerun]

I guess this is the end of our guidelines ;(

[jandudulski]

@sheerun why?

[porada]

Agreed with @sheerun. This delays the entire process of making changes.

[jandudulski]

Do we need to hurry up?

[porada]

The process should be as frictionless as possible.

[porada]

BTW, this whole idea is flawed—starting discussions from a pull request could be better (I’m still against for same reason).

[jandudulski]

starting discussions from a pull request could be better

agree and I'm trying to follow such a flow, but it not happens in every case :(

[teamon]

We are not talking about making new PR but converting existing issue with discussion into a PR

[jandudulski]

We can simplify this rule by saying:

If there are any just tons of :+1: under your guide - you can use closing commit to apply it. Otherwise use PR.

[jandudulski]

We are not talking about making new PR but converting existing issue with discussion into a PR

True, sorry not to mention that.

[szajbus]

PRs are too heavy for that IMHO, especially that the idea is discussed before anyway.

Also... you can always reject the commit :)

[szajbus]

We are not talking about making new PR but converting existing issue with discussion into a PR

I just read it, it makes more sense now

[sheerun]

I think you can update CONTRIBUTING document.

[jandudulski]

I'll do