65
PSA: including a diff in your git commit message can lead to it being applied to the code (github.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 9 months ago (12 children)

The Linux kernel development workflow, the purpose for which git was invented, makes use of emailed patches https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Yeah it's mad. Tbh I don't think GitHub PRs are the best workflow, but I absolutely know that git send-email is the worst. I tried to use it once to contribute to OpenSBI, which inexplicably also insists on it. Suffice it to say my patch was never merged...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Why didn't your patch get merged?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    They wanted me to make some changes and with the normal workflow that's just git commit and git push. With git send-email I have no fucking idea and it got beyond the point where I had enough cared enough to fight the process.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    I haven't heard of any projects but Linux and Git itself using this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Sourcehut uses it, it's actually the only way to interact with repos hosted on it.

    It definitely feels outdated, yet it's also how git is designed to work well with. Like git makes it really easy to re-write commit history, while also warning you not to force push re-written history to a public repo (Like e.g. a PR), that's because none of that is an issue with the email workflow, where each email is always an entirely isolated new commit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    It definitely feels outdated

    What, why?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Compared to e.g. pushing a button in VS code and having your browser pop up with a pre-filled in github PR page? It's clunky, but that doesn't mean it's not useful.

    For starters it's entirely decentralised, a single email address is all you need to commit to anything, regardless of where and how it's hosted. There was actually an article on lobsters recently that I thought was quite neat, how the combination of a patch-based workflow and email allows for entirely offline development, something that's simply not possible with things like github or codeberg.

    https://ploum.net/2026-01-31-offline-git-send-email.html

    The fact that you can "send" an email without actually sending it means you can queue the patch submissions up offline and then send them whenever you're ready, along with downloading the replies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •