From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32421 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2020 19:33:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 32407 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jan 2020 19:33:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=forever, Roger, roger, dust X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:33:07 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 00RJX3HM006493; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:33:03 -0600 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 00RJX2DB006492; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:33:02 -0600 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 20:11:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: "Eric S. Raymond" Cc: Jonathan Wakely , Joseph Myers , Sandra Loosemore , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++ Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clean up references to Subversion in documentation sources. Message-ID: <20200127193302.GB22482@gate.crashing.org> References: <20200113140202.GA63759@thyrsus.com> <3f91720b-c6b3-533f-de39-26f200f5cc34@codesourcery.com> <20200113172455.GA88155@thyrsus.com> <20200113173523.GD60955@redhat.com> <20200113181215.GA126826@thyrsus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200113181215.GA126826@thyrsus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg01781.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 01:12:15PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Jonathan Wakely : > > Email the patches to gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, that's how things get > > merged. > > > > We're not looking to change any workflows now. > > Roger that. > > Once the dust from the conversion has settled, though, there is a > related issue I intend to bring up on the main list. > > You've only collected about 60% of the potential benefits from git > by adopting git itself. The other 40% would come from moving > to to one of the modern git-centric forges like GitHub or GitLab. NAK. Our development model fits our needs well, even with all its warts. A "pull request" model would not fit well *at all*. The "everything passes through email" model is *good*, not in the least because it puts everyone on a level playing field. Everyone can see everything, and comment on everything. And if it slows you down, well, that is a good thing as well probably! Thought and carefulness and looking at things from multiple angles is what we need, not raw speed: we need good changes, we do not need making it easier to get your changes included at the cost of basic quality. Anyway, 90% of the advantages of using Git come from using it *locally*, which many of us have been doing since forever and a day already. Segher