3 ms·
> You think merging/rebasing/resolving conflicts is a pain now? Doing the same thing via email was _so_ much worse. Email is just used to receive the patch, yo
by dustfinger 3y ago
> You think merging/rebasing/resolving conflicts is a pain now? Doing the same thing via email was _so_ much worse.
Email is just used to receive the patch, you should use a tool meant for the job to actually do the merge. I realize that is probably not what you meant though. Besides, when email patching first began, the tooling was in its infancy.
However; today tools like the git cli itself, or magit + smerge-mode (my personal preference) are as good as GitHub, if not better. I never actually use GitHub for merging, even when working on projects hosted in GitHub.
- beepbooptheory 3y agoSpent a long time not even knowing you can resolve merges in github. All I knew was magit and smerge, and assumed people with the fancier editors had something similar.
- mikemcquaid 3y ago> Email is just used to receive the patch, you should use a tool meant for the job to actually do the merge. I know because I also actually did this. You still had to do this locally and then turn it into an email and had no real indication whether someone else had seen/tried/reviewed/etc. it > However; today tools like the git cli itself, or magit + smerge-mode (my personal preference) are as good as GitHub, if not better. I can totally believe for you: this is the case. For most people, though: it will not be. Feel free to prove me wrong by creating a(nother) project that gets thousands of contributors entirely through email. (If you're actually Linus Torvalds, though: you win, I'll shut up now)