Patches vs. 'git pull'

[Lucian Branescu]

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:
>
> https://github.com/parrot/parrot/pull/14
> https://github.com/parrot/parrot/pull/14.diff
>
> 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.