From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout01.posteo.de (mout01.posteo.de [185.67.36.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A3691474B4 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 17:49:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.65 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721411343; cv=none; b=Zf/pWZCnxxFs/uttxBSmRA5CcsM6cka3e0tyoU5/4XKaLsnaU4iqdZnOT145bpMwFx/ed2EMf2/iLjy5m4FbTKBAHXEI5rX7KHUyq5WyghglQMynhCXNHjllfzHChzFeIb/NBREZzyZbi/6wmR5eZ1aatwWbVQcCXn2qgrUoxxk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721411343; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YVTFVIm2+5AcVs9Waq4tOmKBlSps/To5RztSOM7wNFU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=sxWNRTIKfgxseDH38cwJ2gXwLC65CwvXCmMOW5V7IGoRRgtZgz5wtRdNNC5LoGi5/ocnLp18tNixq5lxcH5BnPhyAh1Wu8fzsV0IykawZdAj7ero5Q3BZKTL/3BGWML2aWgazlRHMOg3iRYROyqM+J0NgWI8F5TYaOM9iWab82Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=posteo.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=posteo.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=posteo.net header.i=@posteo.net header.b=Ez0kpCuZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.67.36.65 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=posteo.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=posteo.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=posteo.net header.i=@posteo.net header.b="Ez0kpCuZ" Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B4A0240027 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 19:48:52 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1721411332; bh=YVTFVIm2+5AcVs9Waq4tOmKBlSps/To5RztSOM7wNFU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:OpenPGP:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:From; b=Ez0kpCuZ//17MZemryzCKeh5PLrPF2/aOz6nHgAHixoCCh+luLJy2TSrCmAwGEUnW wbimtXh0H1Mhutl5hBCFUMKUHCCNrajakKnccG79O1z1UVP0sptraMhC8mEr/4oj/+ c+h3vg9/t8y9CDTg0+e1l6qxcK9NM4GAsV9pqyTIKvVcs41JDbP/LmtFzvbPSRM2Xt Tu7zbCvnv1SOQV5S6QNniL1XleD/xNJOjt2T7rygbAP4UK8H2DblvrqV3L0zrJ7QOd iRW5B+Dyiy/VtfjW+SoqiGF+9QLoFDlYWo8NY42ywxbdoAnCPhuOWE+a8D3BMx2kOa Ru20xlpTyYP3w== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4WQcc402H3z9rxD; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 19:48:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Philip Kaludercic To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Best practices for indicating what address to send patches to? In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:21:33 -0700") References: <87msmfrn3r.fsf@posteo.net> OpenPGP: id=7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66; url="https://keys.openpgp.org/vks/v1/by-fingerprint/7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66"; preference=signencrypt Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 17:48:51 +0000 Message-ID: <87msmdmfwc.fsf@posteo.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Junio C Hamano writes: > Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> Hi, I was wondering if anyone had a good suggestion on how to indicate >> where to send a patch to. Ideally I'd like to have "sendemail.to" >> configured on cloning, but that isn't possible IIUC. There also doesn't >> seem to be a conventional file like ".git-email" that would list where >> to send a patch, without having to look it up. >> >> Is this intentional, has it been discussed in the past or is there the >> chance that it might be improved upon in the future? > > The usual convention is to have the patch submission address (if a > project uses e-mail based patch as its workflow) together with other > rules and guidelines the contributors are expected to adhere to in > documents like README, CONTRIBUTING, etc. As an e-mailed patch that > does not follow established conventions is not necessarily useful to > the receiving projects, it is a good practice to put these pieces of > information crucial to start contributing in a single place. > > It would not be an improvement to add a mechanism to make it easier > to find "here is the address" to a reader who hasn't even discovered > where these contributor guide documents are. But is that an argument to prevent projects with mild or now contributor guidelines to make the patch-driven workflow more difficult? I've often contributed to a project by quickly checking out the source code, changing something and then sending a patch (this is easier in the context of Emacs, because we have the a `vc-default-patch-addressee' variable). My suggestion is by no means to mandate this kind of an option, but there are situations where this kind of configurability would be useful, e.g. for Sourcehut projects. > Thanks. -- Philip Kaludercic on peregrine