> > But github changed the > > definition of "pull request": in this workflow, you "fork" a git tree > > (make an identical copy on the github server) by clicking a few buttons > > on github's web ui, make some changes on your copy of the git branch, > > then start a pull request to the upstream by clicking a few buttons on > > github's web ui. The upstream maintainer then can accept or reject the > > changes by clicking a button. So by definition, things are done on the > > web interface. > > There are several reasons why we don't want to do this. We don't want > to have to give a savannah account to everyone that submits patches. > We don't want to redistribute their patches from savannah while we > don't have copyright assignments or while the maintainers have not > judged them.
All of the above applies for patches sent to our mailing lists, what is the difference? > We don't want the submission of patches take up the > savannah hackers' time. How exactly would patches submited to a GNU project take up a Savannah hackers time? > And we don't want to pressure contributors to use a web interface. > It is fine to support one as one method, but the email method > must not be deprecated or rendered undesirable. INCF.
