undefined | Better HN

0 pointsvarbhat5y ago0 comments

Actually, it's not fault of git. Workflow of git takes place through email and patches.

But,github wanted to make this process easier for the people,hence they included issues,fork and PR model. It was easily done with intuitive interface without necessity of email for workflow, but if you have asked me, i would have issues,wiki,etc. integrated within repo just like Fossil VCS.

p2p is cool but not solution to this . gitea/gitlab/etc. already provide importing of issues with repos and if not,they must provide that feature.

0 comments

xwvvvvwx5y ago

> if you have asked me, i would have issues,wiki,etc. integrated within repo just like Fossil VCS.

This is exactly what radicle does.

phoe-krk5y ago

> Actually, it's not fault of git. Workflow of git takes place through email and patches.

This invokes the "it's not a bug, it's a feature" mechanism. E.g. Fossil has no problem integrating issues, merge requests, and wiki pages inside its repositories.

varbhatOP5y ago

Actually, Gitlab and Gitea allows mirror of Github repos with Issues/wiki/PR etc. So, having issues in Github is not at all problem.

I just gave you example of Fossil VCS which has issues,PR,etc. baked into VCS itself.

Actually,what Radicle is doing is to extend git with p2p and not inventing new VCS with issues,etc. baked in.

What i am telling is that p2p doesn't solve this unclear problem and p2p isn't much beneficial to git.

And will there be enough peers to guarantee availability of repo ?

viraptor5y ago

> Actually, Gitlab and Gitea allows mirror of Github repos with Issues/wiki/PR etc.

But GitHub does not mirror the issues/PRs from anyone, so it's a very one-sided connection.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse