- The
network isnotifications are reliable; - Latency is zero;
- Bandwidth is infinite;
- Topology doesn't change;
TransportMaintenance cost is zero;- The
network isrepositories and issues are homogeneous; - The party you are communicating with is trustworthy;
- My contribution is important.
Mostly, the fallacies result in delays in reviews.
In the K8s repository, there have been ~81K pull requests over ten years -- about one PR per hour. Maintainers usually receive notifications per email, resulting in 24 emails daily, not including comments or updates on existing PRs. Notifications can easily be overlooked.
Reviews take time. Ignoring this fact can cause frustration and message (a PR author to maintainers) amplification overwhelming maintainers and causing them to miss important notifications.
Maintainers are limited in number, and pull requests are reviewed one by one.
Organisations change, new SIGs emerge, repository owners leave.
Introducing a new feature or dependency increases the workload for maintainers.
In umbrella projects like Kubernetes, some repositories are less active. Pull requests are reviewed according to their priorities.
Review of a pull request with a typo fix in a repository with no activities in the last 6 months will probably be delayed.
This fallacy affects repository owners. Ignoring it can lead to issues with CVSS score 10/10.
No.
Original fallacies.