Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Email and Git = <3

git-send-email.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 265 posts

Re: Email and Git = <3

#61

Post by oefrha »

rascul wrote: post #56
oefrha wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out the entire configure SMTP step. Honestly I’m not even sure how to do that if your SMTP server requires 2FA and does not allow legacy app specific passwords.

There are instructions provided for Gmail and some others: https://git-send-email.io/#step-2 A tool from Google is mentioned and linked to: https://github.com/google/gmail-oauth2-tools/tree/master/go/...

That uses app specific passwords, and with Google Workspace, the administrator can completely turn off these “less secure apps”. Pretty sure Office 365 has the same.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#62

Post by fodkodrasz »

ploum wrote: post #31
BaculumMeumEst wrote: post #21

I appreciate the effort here, but after learning the workflow and having to get all this set up on a few computers, having to configure git send-mail is honestly just needlessly annoying and absurd. Organizations that insist on using workflows like git send-mail and mailing lists not only drive away a significant number of potential contributors, but they also form a weirdly religious culture that fetishizes needless…

Organizations that insists on using a web interface and ever-changing click workflows not only drive away a significant number of very knowledgeable contributors, but they also form a weirdly irrational culture that fetishizes needlessly graphical content, marketing and fake-usability detrimental to learnability and integration with each user workflow.

In case of GitHub you have this for example : https://cli.github.com/

It is often used in GitHub CI workflows.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#63

Post by nicoco »

BaculumMeumEst wrote: post #21

I appreciate the effort here, but after learning the workflow and having to get all this set up on a few computers, having to configure git send-mail is honestly just needlessly annoying and absurd. Organizations that insist on using workflows like git send-mail and mailing lists not only drive away a significant number of potential contributors, but they also form a weirdly religious culture that fetishizes needless…

It's also possible to not be religious about it. Git is distributed. I have projects on srht and contributing does not mandate using the send-email workflow. "Push it somewhere and let me know where I can pull" always works too.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#64

Post by [deleted] »

mikemcquaid wrote: post #18
keepamovin wrote: post #3

I love this. This is how it was done back in the days of usenet. People would email patches to the linux kernel. Hackers, working alone, late at night, strange times, strange places. Cultivating their work and skills and then ... shoot ... sending an email! Their contribution. So cool! Maybe we should go back to this. Get rid of the whole github thing. Every group their own little mailing list. Laboring in private!

Did you contribute to open source in those days? I did a little (KDE patches to mailing lists before I got Subversion access) and: it was _awful_. You think merging/rebasing/resolving conflicts is a pain now? Doing the same thing via email was _so_ much worse. GitHub has made some parts of open source worse (e.g. how easy it is to now open poor issues while ignoring required information compared to Bugzilla) but the…

[deleted]

Re: Email and Git = <3

#65

Post by catern »

MatthiasPortzel wrote: post #28

> Warning! Some people think that they can get away with sending patches through some means other than git send-email, but you can't. Could someone elaborate on this? Obviously it’s not intended, but is there anything wrong, from a technical standpoint, with using `git format-patch`, zipping the result, attaching it to an email using a GUI email client, and sending it to a maintainer who unzips and runs `git am`?

That specific workflow precludes reviewing the patch via quoting and making inline comments, which is the normal way to review patches when sending them via email.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#66

Post by catern »

oefrha wrote: post #54
emptysongglass wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really kills the fun when contributing to any FOSS project that fetishizes these tools and holds them up as some kind of proof of hacker cred. I've given up. The latency is too high and the tools are terrible.

“Want to contribute? Subscribe to our mailing list that sends a hundred emails a day.” Nope.

You don't have to subscribe to send a patch to a mailing list.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#67

Post by earthboundkid »

tlamponi wrote: post #49
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said they found it difficult to configure , not that they found it difficult to use afterwards.

If your system cannot relay mail correctly already, as most office setups are easy to configure to be able to provide that without extra config, at least for Linux setups, then the set up means having something like the following in their gitconfig: cat .gitconfig # snip [sendemail] to = default@list.example.com annotate = yes suppresscc = self smtpencryption=tls smtpserver=imap.example.com smtpserverport=587 smtpuse…

FWIW, I haven't done that kind of setup for years because modern iOS/macOS does email server discovery, where you enter "bob@example.com" and then it does discovery and figures out the right imap.example.com:587 etc for you by looking at DNS.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#68

Post by raincole »

ploum wrote: post #31
BaculumMeumEst wrote: post #21

I appreciate the effort here, but after learning the workflow and having to get all this set up on a few computers, having to configure git send-mail is honestly just needlessly annoying and absurd. Organizations that insist on using workflows like git send-mail and mailing lists not only drive away a significant number of potential contributors, but they also form a weirdly religious culture that fetishizes needless…

Organizations that insists on using a web interface and ever-changing click workflows not only drive away a significant number of very knowledgeable contributors, but they also form a weirdly irrational culture that fetishizes needlessly graphical content, marketing and fake-usability detrimental to learnability and integration with each user workflow.

GUI is fake-usability now?

Fake Edit: Oh this is HN. Never mind then.

Re: Email and Git = <3

#69

Post by severus_snape »

oefrha wrote: post #54
emptysongglass wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really kills the fun when contributing to any FOSS project that fetishizes these tools and holds them up as some kind of proof of hacker cred. I've given up. The latency is too high and the tools are terrible.

“Want to contribute? Subscribe to our mailing list that sends a hundred emails a day.” Nope.

You don't need to subscribe. You are in CC when people want you to be notified, otherwise there are web interfaces you can browse. See https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/ for example. On each message there is a button: "reply via email to [...]".

Re: Email and Git = <3

#70

Post by earthboundkid »

sneak wrote: post #58
ploum wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That’s your bias showing; GitHub is primarily designed for getting work done, as it is a paid service that needs to serve its customers.

I think GitHub was designed for getting work done, but since Microsoft bought them, they are slowly moving into enshitification territory. For example, they have a homepage that is just a wanna be social media feed and the file contents pages have ads for Copilot and in general there are ads for VSCode and blah blah. It was pretty good, but it's going to get much worse. :-)
Post reply on HN