TIL about `git format-patch` and `git am` 😆 These are coming from a different time period of the history of human kind lol
Conversation
I just remember now that I know some of my followers host their own Git repo and use emails for patches😅I'm so sorry! I understand the motivation, it's really inconvenient, but I salute the effort for owning your data and not support things you don't believe in
2
10
Replying to
Hosting it yourself doesn't require doing it via email.
Gerrit is nicer than the GitHub workflow. It's much better at review and doesn't require making a fork on the site to submit patches. My reason to use GitHub is that it covers more things and people have accounts already.
1
1
On GitHub, you can add .patch to the end of a commit URL and it will give you a patch file.
One common use I have for patch files is to apply a change across repositories without shared history. For example, setting up CI via .github for different projects in the same language.
2
1
3
The Gerrit workflow is that you make your commits and push them to the upstream repository without needing commit access via `git push gerrit HEAD:refs/for/<BRANCH>`.
Commits get a Change-Id and pushing again will update your changes. Also nice for tracking backported patches.
A random Gerrit example where I submitted a patch to AOSP: android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/fra. This was simply `git push upstream HEAD:refs/for/master` from a feature branch.
If I was self-hosting, I'd use Gerrit. Hosting GitLab is a choice to host a huge, complex social media site. Nope.
1
2
I genuinely think it would be a lot easier to teach new people how to use Gerrit than dealing with GitHub. Needing your own remote fork is just weird and messy. Contribute to 100 projects and you have 100 stale, confusing forks in your profile. Really don't like that. *shrug*
1