That's exactly my point. Using a "request-pull" instead of a "pull-request" will probably mean you can do this git-lfs thing with it. My understanding was that it was not working with "forked" repositories, which you need to have to make a "pull request". To make a "request pull" (or to just send a patch file), you don't need to "fork". ;)
Comments
They still use pull requests, though, just in the form of email-based ones.
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-request-pull
Sure. With git-fu and enough emails, you can replicate anything done in GitHub.
I'm just saying it's a very odd choice for an example of GitHub screwing over workflows.
Except that's not a "pull request".
Except it is. Just cause github does pull requests differently doesn't mean you can't do pull requests in pure git. Remember, git came before github.
That's exactly my point. Using a "request-pull" instead of a "pull-request" will probably mean you can do this git-lfs thing with it. My understanding was that it was not working with "forked" repositories, which you need to have to make a "pull request". To make a "request pull" (or to just send a patch file), you don't need to "fork". ;)