On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:26 AM, avih <avih...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I am less concerned about losing this kind of meta-info, as I expect we
> would continue discussion primarily on the mailing list.
>
> Would you/we?
>
> The initial suggestion mentioned pull-requests as being easier to handle
> than discussing patches over mailing lists - to which personally I agree
> (though I don't claim everyone should agree to that).
>
> PRs carry discussions - which typically happen on the PR "page", on github
> and the github hosting would also be quite more useful if people can report
> bugs via github.
>

I had a vision in which the pull requests lived on github, but discussion
of merging (or not) would take place on the mailing list. Even if we don't
use the github facilities for discussion, just having a system for managing
pull requests is a big win, in my book.

That said, I think we can set up email notifications so that any bug
notifications or pull requests would send an email to the mailing list. In
that case, replies would go back to the PR/bug discussion, so we would have
a synchronized discussion.


> Otherwise, if there's no intention to use the github facilities which make
> collaboration easier and more visible, what's the point of moving to
> github? Just a different git-repo host?
>

Having a system for managing multiple pull-requests would be a big win. In
addition, and probably more importantly, it's possible to set up travis and
appveyor testing *on pull requests*, so we could get integration testing
even *before* pulling in the code.

David

-- 
 "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
  Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
  by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel

Reply via email to