[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GitHub “pull request” is proprietary, incompatible with Git ‘request-pull ’

Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> I realise I'm coming to this conversation late, but:
> I have some experience of writing a stunt git push receiver.  I would
> be willing to write another.
> The rough shape would be something like:
>  * Instead of doing git-request-pull, submitter does git push to some
>    special URL (perhaps an ssh git url, or perhaps a git:// one).
>  * Software behind the url stores the incoming branch in an invented
>    branch name in the master repo, so that `git fetch' can see it.
>  * Invented branch name (or url or something) is shown to pushing
>    user, as a reference.
>  * Automatic email is sent to someone saying "someone pushed this for
>    review" with branch name.
> AFAICT this is more or less like git-request-pull except that:
>  - The objects are stored on the reviewers'/maintainers' system (so
>    the submitter does not need to operate or use another git server)
>  - The submitter interacts by doing `git push', not by sending an
>    email.
>  - The maintainers' can see the branches in git on their server.
> (It may be that there is already some software that does this.  If so
> I'm not aware of it.)

Having just been using it for pushing some patches to openstack's gerrit
instance, you seem to be describing 'git-review':



(I guess it would need generalising a bit to work with things other than

Cheers, Phil.
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/    http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,    GERMANY

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: