We either should abandon github mirror, or we must have a process to merge them. A simple comment fix has been there since June 2016. Why would anyone want to ever spend their time contributing to wiki efforts, when they see such disregard for contributions?
The problem is not this specific incident - not a biggie. The problem is that we don't have an overall strategy or tooling to deal with these for all github/wikimedia repos, and remind repo owners in a nagging way ;)
manual watching wouldn't work, but auto-creating phab tickets based on pull requests should solve it. We must allow community to contribute the way it feels the most comfortable with. We shouldn't require community members to learn an obscure tool (Gerrit) in order to submit a 2 line patch.
And since we are moving towards phabricator git hosting, I agree that we may simply clone the PR into it. I would stay away from gerrit's magic :)
T136863: Should Wikimedia have standard policies for managing github mirror repos? exists for the general issue. Either this should be specific to Wikidata or it should be resolved duplicate.
@Aklapper I meant that a phab ticket is a much more convenient way to manage reminders and organize/plan/track work. The review of the code should happen in the code itself, which in this case is actually github (it has an excellent review system).
It is still not ideal, because we also want to auto-build it in jenkins - which means that not only should we track it in phab, we might also want to automate gerrit import and reporting mechanism. This is exactly what travis-ci does - it takes PR from github, runs it, and posts back the results of a test run.