On 20/08/2025 22:16, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Daniele Sassoli <danielesassoli@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 19/08/2025 22:19, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Daniele Sassoli via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git and open a PR either with the "New pull
request" button or the convenient "Compare & pull request" button that may
appear with the name of your newly pushed branch.
+If you're using https://github.com/git/git as your remote, you will need to
+open the pull-request from your fork, selecting `git/git` as base.
+
+The differences between using `gitgitgadget/git` and `git/git` as your base can
+be found [here](https://gitgitgadget.github.io/#should-i-use-gitgitgadget-on-gitgitgadgets-git-fork-or-on-gits-github-mirror)
Looking at the table, there is no advantage to use git/git at all.
Most of the document, including the "Getting Started" section, points to cloning
from git/git. It's only when it comes to the gitgitgadget section that we
mention gitgitgadget/git.
It's true that there are no advantages of using git/git over gitgitgadget/git,
but I would argue that the disadvantages are quite minor and definitely don't
impact someone at their first contribution?
First of all, thanks for taking the time to review this series, really
appreciate it.
Even the disabled things may be rather advanced features, wouldn't
it still impact them for them to stay to be on git/git?
Those started from git/git have to learn what different things they
need to do to use GGG by reading this extra piece of documentation,
and then if they plan to keep using GGG, they will have to do this
extra thing each and every time until the end of time (since your
preference is not to teach switching to GGG/git from git/git).
I think for someone's first contribution, the most straightforward thing to do
is simply to stick with what they have setup so far. If someone finds themselves
doing this more than once, I would imagine they know what they're doing and are
not beginners, so can figure out to switch the remote themselves.
I have no strong opinions as I wouldn't be the one who is doing
something extra every time, but I'd rather see our new contributors
having to spend less time to get their work published and more time
to polish their work into reviewable state.
We're trying to achieve the same outcome, which is why I'm trying to have the
reader follow the path of least resistance in getting their patch to the mailing
list. If they then find themselves contributing regularly and realise they need
the more advanced features of gitgitgadget on a regular basis, I'm sure they'll
figure to switch the remote themselves.
