On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 at 20:39 Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> wrote:
> First, let me add my thanks for sorting this out! > > On Jan 2, 2016 11:45, "Brett Cannon" <br...@python.org> wrote: > > Well, "support" as in "allow". We won't be keeping Rietveld around (part > of this move is so we can get off of Rietveld). > > I guess I'd missed this point. In my opinion, code review in Github is > unpleasant for anything but small PRs and even for those when there's much > back-and-forth. At work we switched to Github. We moved code review off > to reviewboard a few months later. Setting up the webhooks between the two > wasn't hard and code review was a much better experience. Just my 2c. > No one proposed that workflow so it wasn't considered (and I'm obviously not about to start the process again ;). If we find that GitHub isn't working out for code review then we can discuss how to remedy it, but that's not something to consider until we have been done with the transition for several months at least for people to form an informed opinion.
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
