summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/config/notes.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLibravatar Jeff King <peff@peff.net>2019-03-12 17:32:46 -0400
committerLibravatar Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2019-03-13 11:07:50 +0900
commitc3a7dd70c4affe376b2d1ecc1a1a38f1aca0c52d (patch)
tree4abbe796b6c35680349c85b54ba86d65e21c6dac /Documentation/config/notes.txt
parentmingw: allow building with an MSYS2 runtime v3.x (diff)
downloadtgif-c3a7dd70c4affe376b2d1ecc1a1a38f1aca0c52d.tar.xz
point pull requesters to GitGitGadget
In the contributing guide and PR template seen by people who open pull requests on GitHub, we mention the submitGit tool, which gives an alternative to figuring out the mailing list. These days we also have the similar GitGitGadget tool, and we should make it clear that this is also an option. We could continue to mention _both_ tools, but it's probably better to pick one in order to avoid overwhelming the user with choice. After all, one of the purposes here is to reduce friction for first-time or infrequent contributors. And there are a few reasons to prefer GGG: 1. submitGit seems to still have a few rough edges. E.g., it doesn't munge timestamps to help threaded mail readers handled out-of-order delivery. 2. Subjectively, GGG seems to be more commonly used on the list these days, especially by list regulars. 3. GGG seems to be under more active development (likely related to point 2). So let's actually swap out submitGit for GGG. While we're there, let's put another link to the GGG page in the PR template, because that's where users who are learning about it for the first time will want to go to read more. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/config/notes.txt')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions