> > # emailing your commits to the mailing list > git send-email origin/master.. > > # ..or pushing to github > git push github local_branch_name > > You're right. There is effectively no difference between these two except ....
99% of developers know about the push and have never used send-email. But that's not actually the important distinction, what matters is what happens next. After the send-email some fraction of the developers engaged enough to be on a mailing list might be motivated enough to download and have a look at a patch but we've already presented a barrier to entry, cos it's not just click to look. And once we look at the patch, we get a lovely color encoded web view, we get to see the developer stats and their activity. If I'm doing especially well, the CI system might have shown me that the patch compiles, that the tests passed and that it even fixed an existing bug. To adopt the patch one of the chosen few might be able to click and accept it so we don't get emails that complain they posted a patch to the mailing list 6 months ago etc. And it's there for people to find, adopt, fork, improve, contribute further to at lower cost. The point I'm making is that engagement, process, and visibility (the UI thing) actually matter. People these days have an expectation about all of these things and if you're not meeting and hopefully exceeding those expectations you're losing the one currency that matters which is developer engagement. Regards, Bill. And what happens next
_______________________________________________ libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-devel
