There always be a risk, but we can indeed try to minimize it. One solution is to let some days before merging. Another would be to have a bunch of trusted 'greenhouse mergers' that will just check the code doesn't own anything suspect. This is generally easier that full checking funtionality + coding style + side effects + ...hyarion wrote: ↑Tue Jan 05, 2021 9:59 amAh, my bad. I now understand your definition of a greenhouse version. That sounds really cool!
The only down side I can see is that it would be possible to add malicious code that gets executed for unsuspecting users without proper review steps.
Only allowing branches from old contributors would make this less of a problem, but still a potential threat.
How about if we added a time limit as well so it only adds branches that’s been in review for x-days? That way there would be a window to find malicious code.
Anyway, maybe my proposal isn't the right one, but I really think we have to better value code contributions by offering PR authors a quick acknowledgment and feedback.
EDIT : also we can encourage users to run greenhouse version in a sandbox such as Firejail or Sandboxie.