From patchwork Tue Mar 12 21:32:46 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jeff King X-Patchwork-Id: 10850035 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9FAF6C2 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0AB72973B for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id AFEC329741; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:34:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED46E2973B for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726426AbfCLVeE (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:34:04 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:47862 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726141AbfCLVeE (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:34:04 -0400 Received: (qmail 3179 invoked by uid 109); 12 Mar 2019 21:34:04 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:34:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 4224 invoked by uid 111); 12 Mar 2019 21:33:07 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:33:07 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:32:46 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:32:46 -0400 From: Jeff King To: git@vger.kernel.org Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Roberto Tyley Subject: [RFC/PATCH] point pull requesters to Git Git Gadget Message-ID: <20190312213246.GA6252@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP In the contributing guide and PR template seen by people who open pull requests on GitHub, we mention the submitGit tool, which gives an alternative to figuring out the mailing list. These days we also have the similar Git Git Gadget tool, and we should make it clear that this is also an option. We could continue to mention _both_ tools, but it's probably better to pick one in order to avoid overwhelming the user with choice. After all, one of the purposes here is to reduce friction for first-time or infrequent contributors. And there are a few reasons to prefer GGG: 1. submitGit seems to still have a few rough edges. E.g., it doesn't munge timestamps to help threaded mail readers handled out-of-order delivery. 2. Subjectively, GGG seems to be more commonly used on the list these days, especially by list regulars. 3. GGG seems to be under more active development (likely related to point 2). So let's actually swap out submitGit for GGG. While we're there, let's put another link to the GGG page in the PR template, because that's where users who are learning about it for the first time will want to go to read more. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Jeff King Acked-by: Roberto Tyley Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- I feel a little bad sending this, because I really value the work that Roberto has done on submitGit. So just dropping it feels a bit dismissive. But for the reasons above, it seems like GGG is going to be the path forward, and it doesn't really make much sense to have two competing systems unless they have really different feature-sets or approaches (which I don't think is the case). So I thought I'd mark this RFC and see what people thought. :) One thing that I think submitGit can do that GGG cannot (yet), is just take PRs straight on git/git. If we're going to start recommending it, then I think we'd probably want to configure that, since it's one less confusing step for first-timers, who right now might have to go re-make their PR on gitgitgadget/git. .github/CONTRIBUTING.md | 2 +- .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md b/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md index 64e605a02b..7e6df9e429 100644 --- a/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Git community does not use github.com for their contributions. Instead, we use a mailing list (git@vger.kernel.org) for code submissions, code reviews, and bug reports. -Nevertheless, you can use [submitGit](http://submitgit.herokuapp.com/) to +Nevertheless, you can use [Git Git Gadget](https://gitgitgadget.github.io/) to conveniently send your Pull Requests commits to our mailing list. Please read ["A note from the maintainer"](https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/plain/MaintNotes?h=todo) diff --git a/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md b/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md index adba13e5ba..85911a44e2 100644 --- a/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md +++ b/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ Thanks for taking the time to contribute to Git! Please be advised that the Git community does not use github.com for their contributions. Instead, we use a mailing list (git@vger.kernel.org) for code submissions, code reviews, and -bug reports. Nevertheless, you can use submitGit to conveniently send your Pull -Requests commits to our mailing list. +bug reports. Nevertheless, you can use Git Git Gadget (https://gitgitgadget.github.io/) +to conveniently send your Pull Requests commits to our mailing list. Please read the "guidelines for contributing" linked above!