On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 05:28:08PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > FWIW I'd love to see it on git/git for discoverability. From the rest of > your E-Mail it sounds like you're working on that. So just a +1. > > If that doesn't work for whatever reason maybe we can amend git.git with > this to point people to it: > https://help.github.com/en/articles/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-your-repository > > We have one in .github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md, maybe along with *.txt > docs we should amend that, unless of course real GGG on git/git is > imminent... I think maybe you missed the patch that started this thread, which proposes exactly that. :) It should point people in the right direction, but of course getting GGG directly on git/git means that they don't have to re-make their PR on a different repo (though I guess they'd see the template while they're making the PR, and IIRC it's no more difficult at that point than clicking the destination repo box at the top of the page?). > I've also noticed that for 1/1 patches it sends a 0/1, I don't do that, > and personally wouldn't want to (just add any comments below "---"). There was some discussion of that elsewhere recently: https://public-inbox.org/git/20190311202441.GB18263@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > But I'm really happy it's there & useful to people, just not tempted to > use it myself because I have a workflow I use already, and from > observing it in action I couldn't losslessly move 100% of my submissions > to it. That's where I'm at, too. I doubt I'd ever use it, because I really like my workflow. But if it is working for other people, especially people who might otherwise be turned off of contributing, that seems like a good thing (as long as the quality of submissions is in the same ballpark; I think it is, and improving the tooling should keep that moving in the right direction). -Peff
