Re: pull requests for guile

["Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_bab@web.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1433 bytes --]


Josselin Poiret <dev@jpoiret.xyz> writes:

> Reciprocally, I don't think a simple pull request provides much over
> git-am, except that with `format-patch`, everything is simply text, that
> once sent over email (in a decentralized fashion) can be simply
> responded to and read without relying on complicated javascript in a
> browser, and using your mail reader of choice.

I think that this is the biggest advantage of patches by email:
discussing patches via email is more accessible for people with an
existing setup.

Reworking patches iteratively is harder (no simple folding and unfolding
of applied requests, no automatic current diff, no short list of commit
summaries), and accepting patches without changes is harder without
extra setup (no single click on a button), getting an accessible list of
existing submissions takes more knowledge, but the discussion itself is
easier.

With thunderbird such a review would have been somewhat OK, maybe a bit
annoying, but since I switched to reading email with Emacs, reading
patches by email is at least as easy as with a pull-request — and it’s a
system that works on any platform. And I don’t even have much tooling
for that. If I merged many patches, I’d write a small convenience
function to apply the selected region as patch to Guile.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 1125 bytes --]