Re: idea: light-weight pull requests

[Santiago Torres <santiago@nyu.edu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2534 bytes --]

Hello, pabs.

IMHO, the notion of a PR/MR is more specific to Git repository
management tools (e.g., GitHub, GitLab). They all have specific
concepts/ways to manage the way how their hosted repositories behave ---
and I believe this flexibility is one of the beauties in Git . I could
see how this could be implemented by tools like this rather easily
(e.g., using symlinks + inotify or something less hacky).

I'm wondering if standardizing this would be more interesting to those
communities?

I would like to see what becomes of this.

Cheers!
-Santiago.

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 08:32:17AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I had an idea that might be interesting to git folks:
> 
> light-weight pull requests:
> 
> Anonymous and ssh/http-identified users should be able to push just
> using git, within the refs/pull/ namespace, to any non-existent branch
> name or to a branch they created when previously identified, without
> forking off a new repository.
> 
> Advantages:
> 
> Removes the need to look up who to send the pull request notification
> to since configuring that is up to the project itself.
> 
> Removes the annoying scenario of having lots of remotes that have been
> removed after the corresponding pull request was closed.
> 
> Moves popular git hosting services from primarily a model of forests of
> forks to one of contributions to well maintained ongoing projects.
> 
> Allows users to use their preferred git clients to issue pull requests
> instead of using web interfaces of popular git hosting services.
> 
> Creates a new standard for contributing to repositories on all git
> repository hosting services.
> 
> Contributions from people without an account on those services are
> possible.
> 
> Contributions from people without any git repository hosting of their
> own are possible.
> 
> Contributions from people who don't use or dislike MUAs are possible.
> 
> Disadvantages:
> 
> Pull request spam, could be mitigated with configuration options.
> 
> Extra configuration and complexity on the server side. This is once
> only and means less complexity on the pull requester side.
> 
> Will not work with typical setups where the git/http/ssh user does not
> have write access to the repositories. A workaround could be some sort
> of hybrid-repository setup with the new refs and objects in a second
> repository which would be shared by all pull requesters.
> 
> -- 
> bye,
> pabs
> 
> http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]