Patches versus Pull Requests

[David T.]

Thanks John.

I will look at ways to rewrite these sections to reflect current practices and preferences. It probably will mostly entail switching the sequence of information (putting pull requests first), and then offloading the details of the patch process into a separate page for those still wishing to find that.

David

> On Jul 27, 2017, at 10:28 PM, John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jul 27, 2017, at 9:45 AM, David T. via gnucash-devel <gnucash-devel at gnucash.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> In going over some of the wiki information, I ran into a section that goes into some detail about preparing patches for submission. 
>> 
>> While this is, no doubt, still a valid way of submitting changes, is this: a) how the project prefers such changes to be submitted, and b) something that anyone is actively using?
>> 
>> If the answers are “no” and “not many,” then perhaps this information could be removed from the wiki?
> 
> It's still valid and although we do see more pull requests than patches on bugs we still need the procedure available as long as we continue to use Gnome's bugzilla.
> 
> Besides if one is doing a drive-by patch for a bug it's a lot easier to just run git format-patch than to fork gnucash in Github and create a PR.
> 
> Regards,
> John Ralls
>