On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, enh via Gcc wrote: > it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two > problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" > approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to > git/github, or you can use the mailing list otherwise ... taking into > account that what the "barriers" are depend on whose eye's you're looking > through.
My expectation is that such a split would need to work for an initial transitional period at least (for reviews of patches posted before the move to the forge software without requiring all such under-review patches to go into PRs if people want review, if nothing else). While I think there are advantages in terms of structured data if everything ends up using PRs (including people doing PRs that are immediately self-merged of changes in areas they maintain), it would be possible to do otherwise (at least until you get to wanting all merges to mainline to be done by a CI system that maintains a regression-free state for at least one configuration). -- Joseph S. Myers josmy...@redhat.com