It’s not their prerogative to waste my time, just as it’s not mine to waste theirs. If they’re not happy with a PR they’re welcome to reject it, ask me to fix it, or completely ignore it.
When they make a project public they’re explicitly condoning the fact they may get a PR (and nothing else).
I don't think that's true. It appears you just assume that because pull requests cannot be disabled on GitHub.
Sending unsolicited pull requests to people that clearly told you to open an issue first is disrespectful. You don't have to engage with a project or a community, but if you decide to participate by submitting a pull request, you should follow their contribution guidelines.
You do you. I do not think it is, and so far nobody has made an issue out of it.
> It appears you just assume that because pull requests cannot be disabled on GitHub.
It’s more that people that make a public repo on Github and expect no pull requests on even mildly popular software are living in fairyland. Don’t make a repo on Github when you know PR’s can’t be disabled. Or I dunno, install a bot that automatically rejects everything.
You have the option to walk away and not contribute if you don't like the rules for interaction that have been set by the people that manage the project. Or just follow the rules. Those are your only two sane options, unless you become a maintainer yourself at that project, and modify the contribution guidelines.
To be very clear, you have to understand what NO means in this context, and realize that "I don't like bureaucracy" is not a valid reason to push forward on your own terms.
The healthy maintainer-side attitude is that these impose no obligation whatsoever to review, apply, or even look at, the fork in question.
https://docs.github.com/en/communities/setting-up-your-proje...
The emotional side of the burden of closing PRs which don't follow guidelines is the part which can be set aside. It's just a bit of housecleaning, it's seldom done from malice, English is not everyone's first language, etc.
Getting upset that a mechanism which exists and won't change gets used is not healthy.
I don't see why you couldn't just file an issue with the copy-paste of that description, and then immediately file the PR too with a proposed solution.
I don't understand this issue/dispute. I don't understand the problem with filing an Issue to correspond to the PR, it doesn't seem to be any significant extra work or change to the desired workflow of the person who "just" wants to file a PR.
Am I misunderstanding the issue?
I positively detest pointless bureaucracy?
I can live with it when someone is paying me 200k/year for it. Not when I’m trying to give my work away for free.
I’m honestly a bit surprised about how strongly I feel about this.
As a favor for the the person giving you free labor who finds it easier to organize things that way, even if to you it seems like pointless beurocracy, we all have different organizational styles and they find it useful to make sure bugs/scopes/requirements are in Issues with the solutions in Projects?
Yeah, I think you're being unreasonably weird, and on further reflection I don't think this is even a generalizable enough problem to be worth talking about, it's just some weird idiosyncracy of yours to refuse on principle to do trivial organizational work that the maintainers of the project you'd like to contribute to have said makes it easier for them to deal with your contribution. (trivial work; you aren't even saying it would be a burden in terms of time/energy, just that it's a weird principle you have not to do anything you don't want to do even if it makes things easier on other people).
It's kind of just a true-ism of any kind of work we do collaboratively (and submitting a patch to a project that others maintain is such) that you need to do sometimes do things out of consideration for what works for the other people.
I guess I am curious why you are insisting on sending a PR that you know doesn't follow the process the maintainers have asked for -- instead of just not submitting the PR at all though? If you're worried about your time being wasted, wouldn't it be best not to submit the PR at all? Make your own fork that meets your purposes, don't interact with them at all. Now you don't risk wasting the 30 seconds it took to make the PR, when they just close it for not following their procedure since you didn't want to waste the 30 more seconds it might take to do so.