Hacker News Reader

Comment by zie | Hacker News Reader

I just wish they would also support patches. Forcing us to fork and merge back just for GitHub is annoying. Especially for quick drive-by type patches and smaller doc changes and just minor fixes.

I git clone'd the project, built it, noticed something small, fix it locally, and then decide OK I'll just send this up real quick. oh crap. NOPE I have to do a bunch of GitHub crap with forking and merging to get it back to the master tree. Annoying.

Forking and merging is perfectly fine for regular contributions, but for smaller one-time type fixes it's just annoying.

View on HN

FWIW, for smaller drive-by fixes you may press the Edit button directly on a file in some else’s repo.

And in truth, the "github crap" is clicking "Fork" and running "git remote add". Pushing and filing a PR are the same process.

Except your fork now prominently appears even after the PR is merged. However, I don't think Github has a way to see all your PRs.

Here's how to see all your PRs:

https://github.com/search?q=is:pr+author:YOURNAME&type=Issue...

Here's how to see all your open PRs:

https://github.com/search?q=is:pr+is:open+author:YOURNAME&ty...

Replace YOURNAME with your GitHub handle, or pick your colleagues names.

Nice, thanks!

Right, nothing you can do from a git client, unlike a patch.

It's a website. If you want to do it entirely from your terminal, you can use their API.

Patches require you to share the patch somewhere. Your just sharing the patch to a different interface.

Sure, but the GitHub API doesn't accept patches either, near as I can tell. You MUST create a pull request, which requires a fork: https://developer.github.com/v3/pulls/#create-a-pull-request

Unless you know something I don't?

Yes, but the built in web editor is not very nice. So you have to copy/paste it, and of course you want to test and make sure it works first, etc, etc.

I think allowing patches is just a better solution here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com