Episode #125 of the Stack Overflow podcast is here. We talk Tilde Club and mechanical keyboards. Listen now
3 added 2 characters in body
source | link

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has twothree benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes
  3. In addition to retaining a sense of ownership, the contributor is acknowledged and recognized as having made a useful contribution. All of which makes them more likely to continue to contribute

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has two benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes
  3. In addition to retaining a sense of ownership, the contributor is acknowledged and recognized as having made a useful contribution. All of which makes them more likely to continue to contribute

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has three benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes
  3. In addition to retaining a sense of ownership, the contributor is acknowledged and recognized as having made a useful contribution. All of which makes them more likely to continue to contribute
2 Edit in @GlenH7's comment about publicly recognizing the contribution of the contributor.
source | link

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has two benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes
  3. In addition to retaining a sense of ownership, the contributor is acknowledged and recognized as having made a useful contribution. All of which makes them more likely to continue to contribute

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has two benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has two benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes
  3. In addition to retaining a sense of ownership, the contributor is acknowledged and recognized as having made a useful contribution. All of which makes them more likely to continue to contribute
1
source | link

I'd go with option 4: explain to the contributor why his pull request doesn't fit the project's goals (and in the process give the contributor a chance to explain why he thinks it does) and ask him to resubmit a new version containing only the changes which fit the project.

This has two benefits:

  1. You don't have to do the work ;-)
  2. The contributor will get a better understanding of your goals, making it more likely that future contributions don't need any changes