Hacker News Reader

Comment by nemothekid | Hacker News Reader

Go already has an established contributing process, and people who make PRs without bothering to understand that process are likely just making noise.

View on HN

Is their contributing process described in README or in some other file within the repo?

There is, but since we're only partway through migrating to git/github, the README still shows the old instructions. The new contribution instructions will appear here in the next few days: http://golang.org/doc/contribute.html

Not that it really matters, right now, as we're in a pre-release freeze.

Make sure there is a CONTRIBUTING.md file in the repo and Github will automatically highlight it to be read when someone opens a PR

Great suggestion, thank you!

In that case why are they using GitHub?

Linux is on Github as well (https://github.com/torvalds/linux) , and probably like Linus, some people don't like the Pull-request method for dealing with contributions.

Linux is on https://git.kernel.org/cgit/ .

Interesting that the git hipsters are downvoting factually correct information. "Unruly hackers" (pg) seem to be perfect fodder for groupthink and monopolies.

And go is technically on https://go.googlesource.com/go

GitHub is only a mirror. The real work is happening on go.googlesource.com.

https://groups.google.com/d/topic/golang-dev/sckirqOWepg/dis...

GitHub provides the best web-based git repository browser, as well as various other useful features. The only other reasonable alternative for a large open-source project, aside from self-hosting, is bitbucket.

I would like to disagree with the "the best". Mostly because it's obviously your opinion and not something you can say definitely.

Can you give any alternatives?

Well the already mentioned bitbucket, stash, cgit, gitweb, ... My point is that if you like something it isn't automatically "the best".

Sometimes you have to learn to trust your opinion too -- and to learn to access others opinions when there are no definite answers.

Could you describe what makes it the best repository browser?

I like e.g. https://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/chef

I disagree. GitHub looks cluttered and the contrast is too low for speed reading. I prefer the hg interface, for example:

https://hg.python.org/cpython/

Another interface I prefer is:

http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/

You like cvsweb? It's horrible. I'm here: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/CVSROOT/. Why does not clicking a file open the file?!?!? Every freaking file browser in existence opens the file when I click it. It's been designed in the 90s and it shows :(

ironically there is an ongoing discussion on python-devel to migrate from hg to git+github

IMHO it's an error, but I am not a core python developer

> GitHub provides the best web-based git repository browser

I like Bitbucket's side-by-side diff view so much, that I think I prefer Bitbucker for browsing.

But this is only because Bitbucket has the side-by-side diff view, anf GitHub does not.

GitHub introduced side-by-side diffs recently.

Oh, right, thanks. They just call it "split" and not side-by-side.

Lot of replies here disagreeing that GitHub is "the best", and offering alternatives.

Allow me to suggest that GitHub is at minimum the most-visited web-based git repo, which means that if you want a lot of people to view and use your code, it's a good place to mirror.

So that they have the wiki+issues stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com