/tg/Station 13

We need a contribution rule that PRs that don't adequately convey what they do in the title get instaclosed (or force renamed). This misleading title meme has evolved so far that the head maintainer is using it. Obvious exceptions would be highly exploitable bugs (especially if they exist across servers) and shouldn't be announced.

Examples are things like steelpoints "Tweaks boxstation" (actually reshuffles the armory), sligneris' "Tweaks walls" (complete wall sprite redo, I'm sure that won't be controversial), cheridans "Tweaks C4" (balance change that removes the intentional feature of sticking C4 to embedding items), my "Implements Krav Maga" (gave all of sec krav maga roundstart, this didn't go through).

THIS. 1,000 times THIS. Even BIGGER examples are PR titles like "Removes Spears and Stunprods.", which is a blatant lie; It was actually just a deep fryer fix, ">2 cost for 4 second stun per sharp item held, instant aggro grabs, theft of items from hands into your own hand, 3 second stun on harm long distance, pudge hook on help" which was a nerf on changeling tencales, and "Nerfs ore spawns" which actually just added bananium to the ore list.

I am just as tired of this as you are, and it is about time the maintainers started banning for it.

Agreed. I'm sick of people like goofball making PRs like "removes some outdated chems" and then removing trekchems in a way that doesn't even compile.

This is pretty much a non-issue. Almost all of these come from goofball, and they're always memes. The correct solution is to ban goofball if he keeps doing this.

Or just ban him right now because he won't stop ruining everything with his giant broken overhauls that KEEP. GETTING. M E R G E D.

I agree, definitely just goofball.

No! Although he's the most outstanding example, misleading, non-helpful, or straight-up lying PR titles are commonplace when they shouldn't be. Out of many things that do, PR titles and bodies need better information about them. The most outstanding example is the first of those links, the /vg/ lighting port, which actually said that it was migrating the entire codebase over to /vg/ code, and was never changed because the lazy creator just couldn't be bothered. If you look in the comments, you can see that I was mocked for asking a question about the code because I didn't want to assume based off of it alone.

So, no. It's an issue, and it's not just one person.

>joan makes a pr with a title saying it fixes brass box sprite hinges
>also removes slowdown on the box in description
>also SILENTLY makes all clock cult tools fire/acidproof AND wordlessly makes the box 100% invisoble inhand
>IT GETS MERGED

Xhuis wrote:I agree, definitely just goofball.

No! Although he's the most outstanding example, misleading, non-helpful, or straight-up lying PR titles are commonplace when they shouldn't be. Out of many things that do, PR titles and bodies need better information about them. The most outstanding example is the first of those links, the /vg/ lighting port, which actually said that it was migrating the entire codebase over to /vg/ code, and was never changed because the lazy creator just couldn't be bothered. If you look in the comments, you can see that I was mocked for asking a question about the code because I didn't want to assume based off of it alone.

So, no. It's an issue, and it's not just one person.

Probably half of those examples aren't actually misleading. They're just meh.

Yea, your examples suck xhuis

What's misleading about tweaks to wall sprites in a PR called "wall tweaks"?

Mentioning that it's a sprite tweak could be better, i usually think of tweaks in mechanics if not stated otherwise.

Shitposting should be saved for the comments tbh

As valid as this complaint might be, Wall tweaks isn't misleading, it's just vague.

Basiclly we only do this so we can laugh at those of you who don't check the diff before making a comment.

wall tweaks is a pretty accurate name...?
they tweaked the wall sprites.

???

> basing your opinion on code from its title and not the code

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

"complete wall sprite redo"

Here is the fucking quandary
You couldn't possibly have looked at the actual diff, because then there's no way you would have even made this thread.
Yet, it implies that you DID look and decide that it was a "complete wall sprite redo"

what the fuck are you doing, pk

Yeah I got pranked by that, the original PR was

Name: "Tweaks Walls"
Desc: Changes walls sprites, will post pictures soon

So yeah it was misleading
And no I can't look at .dmi files on my phone

hahahah what a story mark

oranges wrote:hahahah what a story mark

youre my favorite customer

PKPenguin321 wrote:Yeah I got pranked by that, the original PR was

Name: "Tweaks Walls"
Desc: Changes walls sprites, will post pictures soon

So yeah it was misleading
And no I can't look at .dmi files on my phone

> PR is clearly simply unfinished
> no pictures yet, but name and description make it very clear what the PR does
> "hurr guys it's misleading"

Sligneris wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:Yeah I got pranked by that, the original PR was

Name: "Tweaks Walls"
Desc: Changes walls sprites, will post pictures soon

So yeah it was misleading
And no I can't look at .dmi files on my phone

> PR is clearly simply unfinished
> no pictures yet, but name and description make it very clear what the PR does
> "hurr guys it's misleading"

The name and desc followed the exact formula that misleading PRs use, I'm sorry! It's like the boy who cried wolf only it's the PR that said it was a tweak

it's tweaking the sprite jesus christ you're complaining about things just to complain

That was one bad example but what I'm talking about is a real issue
Like I wouldn't have thought the walls thing was one if it wasn't such a common thing in the first place

If your title doesn't make it eminently obvious what you're doing in the PR it's a shit title and you need to change it.

Shaps wrote:it's tweaking the sprite jesus christ you're complaining about things just to complain

I don't think that's entirely fair

He might have been wrong on that one but he apologized about it and still had other valid examples

Cheridan and other maintainers are cracking down on this. Look at goofs latest prs.

Haevacht wrote:Cheridan and other maintainers are cracking down on this. Look at goofs latest prs.

or don't

We're dealing with it, nothing more needs to be said.

I guess this thread doesn't have a point, then.
So how about that clockcult, am I right?

oranges wrote:Basiclly we only do this so we can laugh at those of you who don't check the diff before making a comment.

yeah that's pretty much the only reason i do it

its like watching people share false headlines on facebook

I reserve the right to make fun of those who don't research before sharing

iamgoofball wrote:

oranges wrote:Basiclly we only do this so we can laugh at those of you who don't check the diff before making a comment.

yeah that's pretty much the only reason i do it

its like watching people share false headlines on facebook

I reserve the right to make fun of those who don't research before sharing

i think jokes are fine but it starts being an issue when it's done to sneak controversial shit in without anybody knowing until it's too late

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

oranges wrote:Basiclly we only do this so we can laugh at those of you who don't check the diff before making a comment.

yeah that's pretty much the only reason i do it

its like watching people share false headlines on facebook

I reserve the right to make fun of those who don't research before sharing

i think jokes are fine but it starts being an issue when it's done to sneak controversial shit in without anybody knowing until it's too late

so, I guess that wraps the thread up then

I'm cracking down on this. Wasted enough time with these.

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

oranges wrote:Basiclly we only do this so we can laugh at those of you who don't check the diff before making a comment.

yeah that's pretty much the only reason i do it

its like watching people share false headlines on facebook

I reserve the right to make fun of those who don't research before sharing

i think jokes are fine but it starts being an issue when it's done to sneak controversial shit in without anybody knowing until it's too late

nigga check the diff
????????????

Those suck, but im more upset about opportunities missed for funny titles & PR descriptions on the flipside. To show we aren't soulless and robotic.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:Those suck, but im more upset about opportunities missed for funny titles & PR descriptions on the flipside. To show we aren't soulless and robotic.

nothing stopping you from the format of "Meme title (actual title)"

To be honest the enforcement will be towards misleading or deceptive titles.

There will be some slack for meme titles, something I am naturally guilty of myself