-2
\$\begingroup\$

I have requested and successfully received a nice review about a piece of code which relies on a pool of third part services.

Since the code was nicely welcomed with some upvotes I thought that it might be useful to other people in the future and that it would be nice to keep the pool of services updated with contributions from the community.

I therefore edited my question to facilitate this process. However another user edited my question back commenting:

"Please do not recommend continuously editing the question just to update a list of external resources."

I understand that this is not the primary scope of codereview, but so many times I have incurred in very old and outdated Q/A that are polluting my google searches. What is wrong in maintaining the code in a question or answer fully functional and useful? And what is wrong having the community helping the process either by edits or comments?

Note that I am not angered towards the edit, neither I am interested in polemics, I just want to better understand the rationale in order to be more proficient in the future. Also my original idea was to contact the editor privately via chat, but I have not been able to.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "What is wrong in maintaining the code in a question or answer fully functional and useful?" It's a lot of work, nobody will oversee the process and we already have a participation problem (as in, more work than participants to spread the work over). I was the editor and I practically live in The 2nd Monitor. You can always contact me and some of the other users there, as noted in my profile. If you prefer private chat, I can create a pseudo-private chat on request. But I don't mind discussing this in The 2nd. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast May 8 at 9:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ For the record, I understand the sentiment. But the extra work and potential problems don't outweigh the benefit. Partially related is our policy to disallow invalidating code edits. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast May 8 at 9:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast The target of my encouragement was the occasional user who googled out the question, found it useful for their project and had a couple of new services to share. That's it, I had absolutely no intention to redirect the work of the community. I do not believe that such an encouragement could influence how people choose to spend their time online... \$\endgroup\$ – DarioP May 8 at 18:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ ...and for this case I do not think that "code edit" is the appropriate label. The code remains the same in all its shape and functionalities, only the content of a list is being updated. Not that I care so much or that I want to convince you. We can perfectly agree to disagree. \$\endgroup\$ – DarioP May 8 at 18:27
5
\$\begingroup\$

We don't have the tools to help you with your request. If you want to keep the list updated, then creating a GitHub, SourceForge or BitBucket repository will be better equipped for that. Anyone with an account can create a PR and if you set the permissions up, you can get it so anyone can update the list without a PR. You also get additional features such as issues, a readme that isn't a question and integration with many CI tools.

If you want to make the repository and edit your post to include a link to it then that's fine. However keeping the most up-to-date version of your code in the question goes against site policy and is not a great use of anyone's time.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I am not asking the community to redirect their work to maintain my code. I am encouraging anyone profiting from it and possibly knowing additional services, to just share them. Personally I would upvote any single answer that propose even a single link to an additional service, but I feel that many would be reluctant in posting such answers. \$\endgroup\$ – DarioP May 8 at 18:19
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @DarioP The activity you wish to encourage would be better served on the sites I mentioned in my answer. Others can add 'issues' or 'pull requests' to your repository to improve your solution. \$\endgroup\$ – Peilonrayz May 8 at 18:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ For such a silly task as maintaining a list of links, versioning tools seem an overkill to me. Plus they require my active intervention, which means that I can be a bottleneck in spreading the improvements. An open collaborative wiki-style space seems much more appropriate... mmmh maybe this is a decent business idea! \$\endgroup\$ – DarioP May 9 at 19:19
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @DarioP Again that concern was mentioned in the answer. I also provided a solution. \$\endgroup\$ – Peilonrayz May 9 at 19:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .