3 ms·
Not just that, they seem to suggest Github created Git... > the quality of the tech that is Git is a testament to GitHub being able to make it this far in the
by zeroimpl 6y ago
Not just that, they seem to suggest Github created Git...
> the quality of the tech that is Git is a testament to GitHub being able to make it this far in the tech space
But in reality, Github makes Git more complex, because now you have to understand the concept of forks. Not only is there your local copy and an origin, there is a 3rd repository in play.
- hinkley 6y agoWhat other structures would work for having a public forum for PRs? I'm having trouble coming up with many that would be compelling enough to make that change, especially once you consider bad-faith actors in there (eg, I can't flood your git repo with my nonsense, because my code doesn't exist in your repository until the PR is merged) I spend too much time doing archaeology to support squashed PRs, which eliminates a few alternatives I might otherwise suggest.
- zeroimpl 6y agoThey could have added namespaces to branch names. Right now branch names are just a free-for-all. Instead, if they insisted that branch names are always prefixed with "username/", then you wouldn't need forks and anybody could freely submit code to any project. PRs would become MRs. I believe this is how most Git repos are managed within organizations. I'm not sure why public repos need to require users to fork things to propose changes. And isn't this basically how Github works internally anyways? (eg https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24882921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24882921)