From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: pull requests Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87mu87ji39.fsf@dick> <87v9mvp2ms.fsf@blind.guru> <87d093f6lj.fsf@dick> <87369yc79r.fsf@dick> <83mu828c7d.fsf@gnu.org> <7b0e82fd-8928-26d2-4bed-331593685f36@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="112845"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?windows-1252?Q?Cl=E9ment?= Pit-Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 27 15:06:16 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jHpcm-000TGv-IM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:06:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42070 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jHpcl-00050y-Mg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:06:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42016) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jHpcE-0004cW-SZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jHpcD-0000cK-47 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:54327) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jHpcC-0000SM-Rp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:41 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0EC3E1010C5; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:40 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3B793100DA5; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:38 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1585317938; bh=h9Wf6iBfTAYp5wxmMQSs7xI5xaZUzvIBKSA6h6qBCG8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=gGRvjgalrASqJ7UMdCDkVhJq7LpXxI4KXY+HOsdYq7vtthNNHLvlNZKCZYTU1/MA9 SLQmhCQVEtkHgRBfCnglIdbvwFI3E1WNQCl6fllSZT64lr8ClV+Urqa3NeqKEShlWF 6BIYK5o5wyUKWJXrXHbVbSL6Yc/qaB4lecwBSHjJqiKlfykObCiKtomYv8lw5VSoiq 5KDypGNXQnlIDQ4EOfOR8+hEZ87qqr+tZ/MCoXPibJnBPOEUPSDx8cFr/i0br6Oph1 R5hip+g66URf4GGHqPRnyVV8N1fFD2SIYZ3ss5VBhy7nBzFLMf3p3c1i9cjMfVft7T Us1nj4b2KOJXg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0C30120422; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:05:37 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <7b0e82fd-8928-26d2-4bed-331593685f36@gmail.com> (=?windows-1252?Q?=22Cl=E9ment?= Pit-Claudel"'s message of "Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:00:10 -0400") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:245838 Archived-At: >> More importantly, given that I did a review >> of such a remote branch, how do I communicate my comments so that they >> are recorded for posterity? Probably by email, so that doesn't seem >> to solve the main problem of avoiding email in the patch submission >> and review workflow. > > Assuming you use the web UI, you can typically attach comments to code regions. I never use those web UIs when reviewing Git branches. Instead, I fetch those branches with Git and then review them locally (thank god!). > Pros over email reviews include the fact that the comments remain attached > to the code even after the patch is updated (so if the original author > updates an unrelated section of the patch the comments don't disappear) and > the fact that you get to see the full code, rather than just the patch. > > Cons include inferior text-editing capabilities, and inferior code browsing > capabilities compared to applying the patch and browsing around in Emacs > (but you can always checkout the branch, which I find nicer than applying > patches by hand anyway). My foggy memory says there was tool (developed by Google, maybe?) that standardized a representation of annotations to store inside the Git repository, so you could get both benefits (i.e. write your annotations locally with the tool you like and then store them for posterity attached to the code). I can't remember its name any more (and I never used it). Stefan