I guess what I am saying is that we have plenty of ways to get stuff to us (and for us plenty of places to keep track of) and I don’t know if adding a different, but similar, place helps much.
I wouldn’t mind having enough automation in a way that all contributions go through the review board, regardless where they were submitted, but I don’t think that automation is in place today. I also haven’t heard anyone asking us about being able to use a review board (but that’s just my perception) whereas MANY people asked for Pull Requests before we had them. Jan -- On Mar 10, 2013, at 22:02 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure, people can just email patches. > > Would you say that Github pull requests are easier to use/interact with > than sending patches via email? > > I would say they are. You have a list of them, for a start. (i.e. They > don't get lost in your email.) And then you can collect comments on them > all in once place. Line by line, or on the pull request as a whole. > > Review board is the same thing, except it's hosted on Apache infrastructure. > > Have a look: > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/ > > Please note that I am not advocating it. I am bringing it to the > community's attention to see if we are interested. > > On 10 March 2013 20:56, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Mar 10, 2013, at 21:53 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Well, it might be a nice way for: >>> >>> * Non-committers to submit work (without us asking them to use Github) >>> * New committers to get started before they feel confident to adopt the >> CTR >>> model >>> * Established committers to request a second set of eyeballs before the >>> commit lands on master >> >> I am all for making the current process easier, but I don’t quite see how >> adding more steps helps here. >> >> Current ways to submit work: >> >> - Email or link a patch to dev@ or JIRA. >> - Email or link a git commit on dev@ or JIRA. >> - Open a pull request on Github. >> >> What are we missing? >> >>> “without us asking them to use Github” >> >> The situations tends to be that we need to ask people not to use Github >> than the other way around. >> >> Cheers >> Jan >> -- >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> On 10 March 2013 20:49, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 10, 2013, at 21:37 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Not sure if this is related, but I suggested we try out Review Board a >>>> few >>>>> months ago. I have seen it used on other projects when people just >> want a >>>>> code review before commit. Would people find that useful? >>>> >>>> I post to asf git and github which serves as enough of a review system >> for >>>> my work, but I wouldn’t be opposed if others wanted it. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10 March 2013 20:22, vmx <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> GitHub user vmx opened a pull request: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/47 >>>>>> >>>>>> Fix CORS error with attachments >>>>>> >>>>>> When attachments were returned (?attachments=true) while CORS was >>>>>> enabled and used, an error occured. The reason for this error >>>>>> were headers that were encoded as binaries instead of lists. String >>>>>> operations on binaries throw errors. >>>>>> >>>>>> This commit fixes COUCHDB-1689. >>>>>> >>>>>> You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: >>>>>> >>>>>> $ git pull https://github.com/vmx/couchdb 1689-fix-cors-attachments >>>>>> >>>>>> Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/pull/47.patch >>>>>> >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> commit b0420f9006915149e81607615720f32f21c76725 >>>>>> Author: Volker Mische <[email protected]> >>>>>> Date: 2013-03-10T17:34:59Z >>>>>> >>>>>> Fix CORS error with attachments >>>>>> >>>>>> When attachments were returned (?attachments=true) while CORS was >>>>>> enabled and used, an error occured. The reason for this error >>>>>> were headers that were encoded as binaries instead of lists. String >>>>>> operations on binaries throw errors. >>>>>> >>>>>> This commit fixes COUCHDB-1689. >>>>>> >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> NS >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> NS >> >> > > > -- > NS
