3 ms·
Except with git this is all built into the git client out of the box. Git has built-in tooling for sending patches over email and applying emailed patches. It's
by gkbrk 3y ago
Except with git this is all built into the git client out of the box. Git has built-in tooling for sending patches over email and applying emailed patches. It's not something bolted on top, people have collaborated on git repos this way for ages.
Some other federation method through centralized platforms like Github would have to be bolted on to git, email is just the built-in and very much intended method that already exists.
- remram 3y agoWhat you're now saying is that "Git has federation features for patches" which doesn't relate at all to your earlier claim "Merge requests are already federated on any platform using Git". A "merge request" or "pull request" is a specificb thing on those platforms (GitHub/GitLab/Gitea/...) and are definitely not federated. In the same way, Twitter is not federated just because it runs on phones where you could send your message via SMS instead. That makes no sense. Even if SMS is built into your mobile text editor.
- jjmarr 3y agoA merge request is a series of bundled commits layered in a web database somewhere to break compatibility with vanilla Git workflows. That's why Gerrit is better if federation/portability is valuable. 1 commit = 1 code review. You can push a commit to Gerrit for the webui, you can email it to someone for manual code review and merging, you can (maybe) do it in Phabricator, so on and so forth. This is inherently federated in a way that GitHub's pull request system does not. A commit in GitHub requires context in the form of a "pull request" provided by their proprietary interface and so the raw git commit doesn't have everything you need to perform the review. Apologies for not communicating this better in my original comment.