Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The simplest reason is if what I was contributing was done on my employers time and they have strict IP restrictions. It is much, much easier to vet a single changeset than it is to a) verify a whole repo history and b) coordinate around my public/private github identities.


I'm not sure I understand. Vetting a changeset is basically the same thing as verifying the repo. Just look at the hash of repo A (your clone), check that it matches B (upstream), check that your repo A + "patch" matches pull request.

What am I missing?


Branches and the ref log.


I was hoping for more reasons, since the very first and simple one is usually the one that has the most and simplest workarounds. You could for example make a patch with git on your local machine and attach that to an issue.


And then I have to follow a completely different work flow and inconvenience the maintainers.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: