Proposal: accept pull requests on GitHub
oleg.grenrus at iki.fi
Wed Sep 9 13:03:19 UTC 2015
As a junior ghc contributor, I have to comment that
git push -u my-fork my-branch
are about of the same “cognitive load”.
Yes, one must have arc on the machine, but if the right version could live as a submodule in GHC tree: even better.
And a bit tangental comment: I can imagine some isolated component to be developed by responsible people in the way they find the most productive, and then pushed to the central repository, in smaller or larger chunks. So not single central repository, but more like a tree. Yet Austin/GHCHQ would need to care only about the root.
For example someone with push accept could say “I’ll review and accept GitHub PR touching only base-library in the GHC tree, and submit Phab differentials upstream”. The con, is that the communication distance between original contributor and the end reviewer in Phabricator will increase, but it could still work if the person in between is committed enough. Yet base is a bit of the bad example, as almost every change is first discussed on the libraries-list.
In some sense, this is “Phab differential off a GitHub branch”, but with a real person in between, not the script.
And maybe someone does something like that already, but not publicly . Git is distributed system after all.
> On 09 Sep 2015, at 15:17, Richard Eisenberg <eir at cis.upenn.edu> wrote:
>>> (I'm tempted naively to ask: is there an automated way to go from a GitHub PR to a Phab ticket? Then we could convert the former (if someone wants to submit that way) into the latter.)
> Or: is there a way contributors can create a Phab differential off a GitHub branch? This bypasses the GitHub PR but still provides a similar ease-of-use. This one seems rather easy to imagine.
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the ghc-devs