(Late response -- it's been a busy month) We tried this over in the tn3270e working group, and it didn't work so well. The comment chains became very unwieldy very quickly -- especially if the points that needed discussion were complex. We eventually dropped back to mail to resolve the complex issues, and pretty much determined that gerrit was a fine tool for code and structured stuff, but didn't really lend itself well to human-oriented texts.
So, just a field experience with it, FWIW. Interesting experiment, but I don't think it'll really help. We'd need a serious collaborative writing tool with versioning to start doing joint composition or editing tasks. Framemaker has some of what we'd need, but it's bloody expensive and a PITA to learn how to use. Not probably worth it. Let's stick to plain text. Easier for everyone. --d b On 12/7/10 2:14 PM, "Jeffrey Altman" <[email protected]> wrote: >Given the recent experience of OpenAFS using gerrit for code review I >can't help but think that gerrit would be an excellent tool for the use >of I-D review. > >Verified would be passing idnits without error or indicating an >implementation generated from the proposed standard. Code Review would >be used to indicate up or down votes in favor of the current version. > >Most importantly, gerrit would permit discussion over specific portions >of the text to be held within the body of the text itself. > >Is this something the group would like to try? > >Jeffrey Altman > _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
