From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Konstantin Kharlamov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:27:40 +0300 Message-ID: <1553261260.18473.1@yandex.ru> 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: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-5; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="85429"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: Tim Cross , Emacs developers , Dmitry Gutov , Tadeus Prastowo , Eli Zaretskii To: Philippe Vaucher Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 22 14:38:53 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 1h7KNp-000M7q-4E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 14:38:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57503 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7KNn-0006gY-Vs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 09:38:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58277) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7KKp-0004Gr-RD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 09:35:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7KDB-000291-3v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 09:27:54 -0400 Original-Received: from forward103p.mail.yandex.net ([2a02:6b8:0:1472:2741:0:8b7:106]:40217) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7KD7-000201-86; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 09:27:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mxback4o.mail.yandex.net (mxback4o.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1a2d::1e]) by forward103p.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 386A418C2442; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:27:43 +0300 (MSK) Original-Received: from smtp4o.mail.yandex.net (smtp4o.mail.yandex.net [2a02:6b8:0:1a2d::28]) by mxback4o.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id yEnrZyxvac-RgIWdBeB; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:27:43 +0300 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1553261263; bh=uv9gaZFuzYSBUVy06+YyCScrrHx11JbIxTqJNlF4KQg=; h=In-Reply-To:Cc:To:Subject:From:References:Date:Message-Id; b=o9k+S3MFytUpKqpB/7URcDK7VznrOahyWHfFoR8B49YIEVWAwFugvO8+qK71tMP3c 4e37H0kD7deTR3wMvf+tk3IiSItqJneS/SwKGXj7yBeVlq/txu9Sl7FAF+BIlr3ghj jfek/sKrXA2A/+vFiQ7gmi1ZGqkJ89bucRPSOyoo= Authentication-Results: mxback4o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Original-Received: by smtp4o.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id 7eTPBCJ5ya-RfheNsb1; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:27:41 +0300 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: =?UTF-8?Q?geary=2F=C3=8E=C2=B2=2Dtesting=2Dbran?= =?UTF-8?Q?ch=7Eg4db93c55?= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a02:6b8:0:1472:2741:0:8b7:106 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:234559 Archived-At: On =BF=E2, Mar 22, 2019 at 15:38:38, Philippe Vaucher=20 wrote: >> > I loosely follow this discussion, but I'm curious: isn't a git=20 >> branch >> > workflow equally well supported? I did contribute a bit to=20 >> Emacs, and >> > what i did was push a feature branch and ask for it to be=20 >> reviewed and >> > merged. Not quite what Gitlab does, but closer than sending=20 >> patches >> > by >> > email. >>=20 >> 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=20 >> access >> stuff on unknown sites". But if that's supported, I'd definitely=20 >> use it. >=20 > Same here, if I can just point people at my fork or even better=20 > directly push to private branches on the Emacs repo, I would prefer=20 > this method compared to having to generate & send patches by email. >=20 > The code review aspect of doing so is not so great tho... the one=20 > thing the ML does right is the ability to inlinecomment the code=20 > submited, like what you can do in a PR on github/gitlab. I understand=20 > it'd still be possible but it then requires the code review guy to do=20 > the copy/pasting instead of the submitter. Ah, good point, I didn't think about it. Then we back to square one. =