4 ms·
I will note that contributing to GitHub is pretty much just as complicated, and requires just as many steps and git commands. The difference is that folks are u
by Manishearth 10y ago
I will note that contributing to GitHub is pretty much just as complicated, and requires just as many steps and git commands. The difference is that folks are used to contributing to GitHub.
And that's an important difference. I feel that projects should allow newcomers to contribute through multiple channels. For tiny patches from newcomers, it doesn't really hurt to let them make patches on github, go through review (without annoying other folks with nitfix review emails), and mail the final patch to the list for them. Of course, as they start to contribute more, nudge them towards the "real" patch process. This moves them towards contributing the regular way without the process being one more barrier in the way of entry.
I've mentioned this in http://manishearth.github.io/blog/2016/01/03/making-your-open-source-project-newcomer-friendly/ http://manishearth.github.io/blog/2016/01/03/making-your-ope... -- you can tailor your process for newcomers. Your current process is probably great for power users but might be complicated for newcomers, but at the same time a lot of what makes the process great really isn't necessary for the patches that most newcomers contribute.
Of course, all this works when the project actually cares about helping newcomers. As mentioned in the other comments, it seems like Linux doesn't care about this; it prefers to restrict itself to contributors who can (and want to) figure it out on their own. This could end up filtering out smart people who could have figured it out (but found better uses of their time), but that's their choice.
Not to say that projects which don't do this don't care about this. GDB has a pretty complicated process, but they're also very helpful to newcomers. I might work on providing an alternate workflow or a mentoring process at some point. Firefox is similar; the bugzilla-based workflow can be new and tricky, but there's mentorship. (Another thing I may work on improving at some point)
- justincormack 10y agoFreeBSD maintains a github workflow as well as their more traditional svn workflow to make the project more accessible.
- adrianratnapala 10y agoBut if their traditional method is SVN, then there is a bigger reason to have some git element available. Linux already uses git, and has less incentive to add in a "git, the hard way" option.
- Manishearth 10y agoWell, patch emailing can be done from any vcs, as long as there is something to clone from :) One of the main reasons git is popular is because of github, and consequently there are lots of folks who only know the github workflow. Switching to patch emailing would be almost as new as using a new vcs for many. At least, that's my experience with folks I've mentored.