Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

2
  • Care to specify why encouraging the initial author to merge their own pull requests would build a sense of ownership? I believe in collective ownership and consider open PRs as statements of shared ownership between initial author and reviewers/community. I respect your opinion, would like to hear more about how the control over who hits merge translates to sense of ownership. Being able to open a pr and have others review and discuss already brings enough ownership, but I had another person tell me about ownership the same way you did, so I would like to understand that point. Commented Mar 3, 2021 at 17:49
  • 6
    @leosteffen in a team project, ownership is shared and collective. By definition. I'm not calling this into question. The author of a given PR knows their PR better than anybody else; even if they provide a great PR description, as they should, the consequences of merging the PR cannot typically be clearer and more comprehensive to other contributors. By merging your own PR, you know exactly when it lands into master (now, main) and you take responsibility for it from start to finish. Commented Apr 23, 2021 at 21:40