use in email-based patch workflow?

[alterae]

hi! i do a lot of my coding over on Sourcehut, which uses a patch workflow based on git send-email rather than GitHub-style pull requests. i was wondering what it would look like to use jj in such a workflow

[ilyagr]

Currently, it'd probably be easiest to have a jj repository co-located with Git and use git send-email itself. We don't have any explicit support for this workflow at the moment -- there is no jj send-email or equivalent -- but doing it via Git should work fine. I'm not sure we have many users that tried it; we appreciate any experience reports and bug reports.

It's an interesting question whether jj could have a better UI for it than something equivalent to just using Git as I described; I'm not sure.

Update: https://martinvonz.github.io/jj/latest/FAQ/#should-i-co-locate-my-repository might be quicker to read.

[ilyagr]

I've been reminded on Discord that this has been discussed on Discord. Here's one discussion I could find:

https://discord.com/channels/968932220549103686/968932220549103689/1273752874408476786

(The invite link is in our README). There might also be discussions here on GitHub. If not, this could become "the discussion", or you can open a feature request.

This also means that somebody other than me might have more thoughts and information.

[ilyagr]

A collection of Discord backlinks: https://discord.com/channels/968932220549103686/968932220549103689/1297615561047412827

(Though it might be nice if we started a discussion on GitHub for easier tracking of people's thoughts)

[alterae]

A collection of Discord backlinks:

I saw! I think I actually prompted the conversation that lead to that collection.

(Though it might be nice if we started a discussion on GitHub for easier tracking of people's thoughts)

It very much would. More searchable and less ephemeral (see the other discord discussion immediately following those backlinks, in which we discuss the merits of putting important stuff in places that aren't discord).