From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philippe Vaucher Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 13:38:38 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1552789070.5272.1@yandex.ru> <1552791707.5272.2@yandex.ru> <1552793646.5272.3@yandex.ru> <1552821396.21432.0@yandex.ru> <83imwhwf4x.fsf@gnu.org> <837ecvux2q.fsf@gnu.org> <9c7cf558-a2d3-951e-d6e1-31b3ad5900cf@yandex.ru> <1553064994.13109.0@yandex.ru> <831s32t3fn.fsf@gnu.org> <87mulnxkik.fsf@mbork.pl> <1553253896.18473.0@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e698c10584ae239b" Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="126981"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: Tim Cross , Emacs developers , Dmitry Gutov , Tadeus Prastowo , Eli Zaretskii To: Konstantin Kharlamov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 22 13:50:17 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 (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h7Jcl-000WsI-5W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 13:50:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56895 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7Jck-00077O-28 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 08:50:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:45744) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7JcV-0006xK-BG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 08:50:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7JS0-0006FY-MT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 08:39:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::232]:41440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7JRy-00069l-Ic; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 08:39:07 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id k8so1890863lja.8; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 05:39:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bg/XDi2It6zztBeC0QSddGk/wSiofBAddzZeTXuIvVg=; b=JhEPGa80FK10Gq7vtlFuRv/S+kCSFHXcdPx2tuvhtVDWPbc2lQzq6NaPbGfwKmUg/m 3F5vBjahm594WgRGkBC+R3ZIO+rW2wQnTPuJytoA9dIIWyEYBCH+qWOxwgGaORT7E6UA /DyNbSLNFSs90rFk1A91PyrcEhAEX8FoY0d/w2oBqPMlnTV3B3VhOoF0DaWbMrUnqkmo wGUhRPWIRHfhvmoeqtl9WoHGGj4XGqMa3aeTJVUlfPnMbQb4aO4iODxLfCb0NxjP9Erw MM56955yR7a57GBeGUtLdZcwQ3bGcdTYX5imGjoPTECijaRsBz4ZZ87f2Kd9+cNOM4j5 1xDg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bg/XDi2It6zztBeC0QSddGk/wSiofBAddzZeTXuIvVg=; b=bpKBapNG43ZHvNaDK2wPi1aPhFB+HRSNwHs93bRyVTSQQ5QaH3fSOPcUQLK4xVArf+ OZQ2QjTmCAZues7gnDTK6bW40zdHkUlwo1REnLjsfw4CPciMnYz1nyN0JqJ8+NQNkzrN 5RdZe+0J1y9pD4rGCNuwZxiPmvvasRNr8xyXa2crGpNNsrNervjChfCetUGMh3qTDzTw qgOi4jGRPufKSXipTOb+fPCW14yl9Xuia/eFZgyjdyL7yHMp+NP3rkX94B1JoZL1xgA7 9puJi8x9NUCLjtCFl1EyMFTde4AdhRRZZ40sQutfo5c45TVp813z1cbnuiLfw/JAaaWx VJwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWw+tYPk9IYFY2K4A/h6vaE0nSHjglmoZdqr1+3zmDPasWDR8A6 9pMon8Um/V+KuNKRfNQTUL+0jXsPiNU0yMY7jiQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz3qUsAf5nCl6rKpC8eixaardmEcy84SRc+bbEVIxyrn7GUDXxn+noehwro4DnL+I2hjPp3Dk+wQqNsr6VkodQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:380c:: with SMTP id f12mr5081935lja.116.1553258345042; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 05:39:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1553253896.18473.0@yandex.ru> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4864:20::232 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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:234551 Archived-At: --000000000000e698c10584ae239b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > > I loosely follow this discussion, but I'm curious: isn't a git branch > > workflow equally well supported? I did contribute a bit to Emacs, and > > what i did was push a feature branch and ask for it to be reviewed and > > merged. Not quite what Gitlab does, but closer than sending patches > > by > > email. > > This might work. I'd be afraid of sending patches on my own that way > because I don't know an attitude here to "making developers to access > stuff on unknown sites". But if that's supported, I'd definitely use it. Same here, if I can just point people at my fork or even better directly push to private branches on the Emacs repo, I would prefer this method compared to having to generate & send patches by email. The code review aspect of doing so is not so great tho... the one thing the ML does right is the ability to inlinecomment the code submited, like what you can do in a PR on github/gitlab. I understand it'd still be possible but it then requires the code review guy to do the copy/pasting instead of the submitter. --000000000000e698c10584ae239b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> I loosely follow this discussion, but I'm curio= us: isn't a git branch
> workflow equally well supported?=C2=A0 I did contribute a bit to Emacs= , and
> what i did was push a feature branch and ask for it to be reviewed and=
> merged.=C2=A0 Not quite what Gitlab does, but closer than sending patc= hes
> by
> email.

This might work. I'd be afraid of sending patches on my own that way because I don't know an attitude here to "making developers to acc= ess
stuff on unknown sites". But if that's supported, I'd definite= ly use it.

Same here, if I can just point p= eople at my fork or even better directly push to private branches on the Em= acs repo, I would prefer this method compared to having to generate & s= end patches by email.

The code review aspect of do= ing so is not so great tho... the one thing the ML does right is the abilit= y to inlinecomment the code submited, like what you can do in a PR on githu= b/gitlab. I understand it'd still be possible but it then requires the = code review guy to do the copy/pasting instead of the submitter.
--000000000000e698c10584ae239b--