Say you want to contribute to a project and find out the only way to do so is by discussing the issue on IRC or the mailing list, then submitting the patch per email.
Say you want to contribute to a project and find out the only way to do so is by discussing the issue on IRC or the mailing list, then submitting the patch per email.
Do you find mailing lists easier to use than pull requests / merge requests? And how do you find following a discussion in a mailing list?
For newer/inexperienced users mailing lists are definitely easier. Everyone can send an email.
From a contributor point of view, mailing lists are definitely easier than pull/merge requests - you just send a patch which you can create in any way you want to an email address.
Following a discussion is easy - it’s just a list of messages. In fact, it is easier for me since I use Gnus as my email client, which gives me a threaded view of discussions on the list.
Yes and it depends to both questions.
I participate in projects being developed on Github that have 5k+ open pull requests and the same amount of issues. At that volume of communication, the Github workflow of "clicking through stuff" is way inferior to an efficient email workflow. Essentially, your workflow turns into email anyways because its the only sane way to consume based on push, and yes, I know, you can reply to Github using email, but its not nearly as good as something made for email.
So, in my opinion, email is simpler to use that pull request. It is not easiser because it is not close to what people are used to.
I don't agree. Any conversation on pull requests happens through issues/tickets, which already aggregate all related events and are trivially referenced through their permanent links, including through the Git repo's history.