Patches vs. 'git pull'
lucian.branescu at gmail.com
Wed Dec 1 13:50:25 UTC 2010
On 30 November 2010 14:33, Nick Wellnhofer <wellnhofer at aevum.de> wrote:
> On 30/11/2010 13:16, James E Keenan wrote:
>> So, again speaking for myself, I'm going to assign a higher priority to
>> responding to patches submitted via (a), (b) or (c) above than to 'git
>> pull' requests. In particular, if I'm interacting with people on
>> #parrot, I can apply patches submitted via 'nopaste' much more quickly
>> than 'git pull' requests.
> There's a secret way to get raw patches from Github by appending '.diff' to
> the end of the URL. This also works for pull requests:
> This can be incredibly useful and I wonder why Github doesn't make this
> feature public.
It's also possible to use git diff to make a patch. It requires you to
first clone the repo, but it gets you a patch. I'm pretty sure that's
how github generates it.
More information about the parrot-dev