proposal - contribution workflow - PR-only for pre-fixed Issues

> El 14 jul 2019, a las 10:30, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
> Some improvements are often discovered, fixed and submitted all in the same moment - prior to their being an existing Issue logged.
> When we were using MCZ files that had no facility to hang a discussion on them,
> it was a good policy that **every** contribution required an Issue as a place for discussion and approval.
> However we are now using Pull Requests that provide such a facility for discussion and approval.
>
> There is not much difference between an "Issue" and a "PR" - indeed their index numbers are interleaved.
> So when we already have a PR ready to go, it seems redundant to first create an matching Issue just to have something to close.
> It seems particularly redundant when an Issues is created and closed within the same hour a PR is submitted and unnecessary double-handling.
>
> So I propose that pre-fixed-issues that a submitted with a code contribution require a PR-only
> and "Issues" are left for reports without an immediate fix that require longer term visibility.
>
> cheers -ben
>
> P.S. Thank you Torsten for your stream of small fixes.  
>
>
> <x.png>

> On 14 Jul 2019, at 11:26, Guillermo Polito <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> I agree.
>
> In general, I too do see that this artificial separation is adding little/no value.
> This would also simplify a bit the build scripts: instead of having to parse the PR name to get the issue number, we could just use the available PR number.
>
>> El 14 jul 2019, a las 10:30, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> escribió:
>>
>> Some improvements are often discovered, fixed and submitted all in the same moment - prior to their being an existing Issue logged.
>> When we were using MCZ files that had no facility to hang a discussion on them,
>> it was a good policy that **every** contribution required an Issue as a place for discussion and approval.
>> However we are now using Pull Requests that provide such a facility for discussion and approval.
>>
>> There is not much difference between an "Issue" and a "PR" - indeed their index numbers are interleaved.
>> So when we already have a PR ready to go, it seems redundant to first create an matching Issue just to have something to close.
>> It seems particularly redundant when an Issues is created and closed within the same hour a PR is submitted and unnecessary double-handling.
>>
>> So I propose that pre-fixed-issues that a submitted with a code contribution require a PR-only
>> and "Issues" are left for reports without an immediate fix that require longer term visibility.
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>> P.S. Thank you Torsten for your stream of small fixes.  
>>
>>
>> <x.png>
>
>