From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "If you're still seeing problems, please reopen." [Was: bug#25148:] Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 18:25:49 +0200 Message-ID: <83wobuzf8y.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20191117113054.49837.qmail@mail.muc.de> <87pnhq7mxg.fsf@gnus.org> <87bltaz9g4.fsf@telefonica.net> <834kz25qp9.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2wexsv1.fsf@telefonica.net> <83sgmm4a08.fsf@gnu.org> <87h832xqxr.fsf@telefonica.net> <20191117192558.GC11551@ACM> <87a78uxot6.fsf@telefonica.net> <87a78uuvde.fsf@gnus.org> <8853390e-f4a5-c295-4f94-cf417ec8db5f@yandex.ru> <83wobv2684.fsf@gnu.org> <878soakddl.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="73632"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 20 17:26:14 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iXSo1-000Izf-3t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 17:26:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60246 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iXSnx-0001V9-Ng for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:26:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44590) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iXSnp-0001QI-9D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:26:02 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43377) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iXSno-00043Y-G4; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:26:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2559 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iXSnU-00052q-Ru; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:25:41 -0500 In-reply-to: <878soakddl.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Wed, 20 Nov 2019 12:15:18 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:242497 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: Dmitry Gutov , rms@gnu.org, ofv@wanadoo.es, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 12:15:18 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > If we want to support pull requests, there are more things to do than > > just the above. > > I don't think our work flow has to change for pull requests. Not our work, the setup for the server that will host the repositories to which users push their changes for pull requests. > Of course, if somebody wants to hit the "merge pull request" button > in Gitlab, they can do that, but for most smaller pull requests, > Gitlab would just email the patch (presumably) and we can apply it > locally on our machines before pushing to the repo, just like now. What you describe is not the PR workflow that people are used to.