Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:00, Eric Gallager via Gcc wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:09 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc > wrote: > > > > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] > > > > Just a general remark. > > > > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up > > their git reposit

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Arsen Arsenović
Thomas Koenig writes: > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] > > Just a general remark. > > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up > their git repositories because they have no mental model > of what git is doing (case in point: The Fortran unsigned > branch, which I mana

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Eric Gallager
On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:09 AM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote: > > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] > > Just a general remark. > > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up > their git repositories because they have no mental model > of what git is doing (case in point: The

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Iain Sandoe
> On 23 Sep 2024, at 15:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:36, enh wrote: >> >> it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two >> problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" >> approach --- you can use pull reque

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 16:20, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Jonathan Wakely: > > > The discussion is about how we do patch submission and patch review. > > The GitHub pull request workflow is widely seen as simpler than our > > current email-based workflow (not everybody agrees, of course). The > >

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Florian Weimer
* Jonathan Wakely: > The discussion is about how we do patch submission and patch review. > The GitHub pull request workflow is widely seen as simpler than our > current email-based workflow (not everybody agrees, of course). The > idea is to *lower* the barrier of entry for contributors, not rais

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Joseph Myers
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, enh via Gcc wrote: > it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two > problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" > approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to > git/github, or you can use the ma

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:36, enh wrote: > > it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two > problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" > approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to > git/github, or you can use

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread enh
it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to git/github, or you can use the mailing list otherwise ... taking into account that

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 13:09, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote: > > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] > > Just a general remark. > > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up > their git repositories because they have no mental model > of what git is doing I highly recommend

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:08 AM Thomas Koenig via Gdb wrote: > > [For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] > > Just a general remark. > > There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up > their git repositories because they have no mental model > of what git is doing (case in point: The

Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain

2024-09-23 Thread Thomas Koenig
[For the fortran people: Discussion on gcc@] Just a general remark. There are people, such as myself, who regularly mess up their git repositories because they have no mental model of what git is doing (case in point: The Fortran unsigned branch, which I managed to put into an unrepairable state