On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 01:36:54AM +0400, Vadim Evard wrote: > By the way (sorry if this was discussed before and is a strong > decision) I'd say e-mail based workflow is of course very flexible - > and very very novice-unfriendly. Dash, I had to learn git commands > I'd never use in my usual workflow with local or Github repos. And, > well, I was not very good with that. 10 ways with 10 options in > each. You all saw my previous patch mail with "fubar" header and no > signed-off-by string. > > Is there a reason you (team) don't use e.g. Github at least for > trivial patches?
Yes, the email-based approach is the most flexible but also has a learning curve. For one-time contributors it can seem like wasted effort. The QEMU community is familiar with the email-based workflow and has customized it. One key idea is that all patches go through qemu-devel@nongnu.org - even trivial patches are exposed to code review from the whole community. A new vector for code submission still needs to keep this property. For another open source project that I'm involved in I have set up a cronjob that sends GitHub pull requests to the project mailing list. This way the mailing list still sees all patches before they get committed. Replying to patches doesn't work though - you still need to log into GitHub in order to send comments to the author. I can't ask all QEMU developers to do that. Any ideas how to make GitHub work with QEMU? Stefan
