Re: Sending in patches

[IT Superhack <itsuperhack@web.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3125 bytes --]

Hello Michael,

Michael Tremer:
> Hi,
> 
> so about half a week has passed since my initial email. I suppose this
> is all that is coming and that the others are perfectly satisfied with
> this process.
> 
> So let's conclude:
> 
> On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 21:40 +0100, Larsen wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 22:54:26 +0100, Michael Tremer  
>> <michael.tremer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I find this process with "git send-email" very easy and I am
>>> not sure where the problems could be.
>>
>> I am using TortoiseGit with Windows 7. I don't know if this tool
>> supports  
>> "git send-email" and I wouldn't want to use command line git (it is  
>> annoying to use more than one tool for the same job, IMHO).
> 
> 
> I didn't know that this many people use Windows. The problem with that
> is you cannot build the distribution. You can copy some files back and
> forth, but never build.
> 
> I consider this to be a huge disadvantage.
> 
> Is this just by choice or did you not want to go through the trouble
> setting up a Linux system?
> 
>> Therefore, I  
>> create a patch file using TortoiseGit (I need a workflow reminder for
>> this  
>> to get it right), then send the contents with Thunderbird where I
>> have to  
>> remember to disable line wrap (also using a workflow reminder text).
> 
> When ever you make personal notes, why not use the wiki for that and
> share? Many other people might have the same questions.
I recently wrote a page about sending in patches via a Mail User Agent.
It can be found here: https://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/send-tb-patches
(Thanks to Matthias Fischer here who sent me a good hint about disabling
line-wrapping in TB.)
> 
>> In other projects (using Github), IMHO it is much easier to push to
>> one's  
>> own repository and create a merge request to the upstream repository.
> 
> 
> We can't use GitHub. I have explained that at various occasions and
> this thread wasn't started to discuss other tools. Other things have
> been proposed, too, and the same goes for them.
> 
> At the end the only problem I understand you are experiencing here is
> actually emailing the patch files without your mail agents not making
> garbage out of that. This can't be too hard to get right.
> 
>> Discussion can take place with that merge request.
> 
> No, not at all. This process is actually well thought through and
> designed to maximise participation of the users and make everything
> easy for developers. And I actually think it does that well.
For me, sending in patches is not a very big issue since you only need
to "set up" a system for sending in patches once.

The problem is more the workflow after a patch has been sent in. Some
of them seem to be dropped silently, while others are commented and then
somehow forgotten. Perhaps I need to polish my english skills in order
to add better descriptions to my patches... ;-)
> 
>> In case you are open to using other tools in place of Patchwork, what
>>   
>> about Gitlab?
> 
> Patchwork is just a view to the patches. My actual repository for that
> is my inbox.
> 
>>
>>
>> Lars
> 
> -Michael
> 
Best regards,
Timmothy Wilson



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]