On 19 Feb 2014, at 03:13 , Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn. <[email protected]> wrote:
> The patch creation is simple but the real problem is the culture. Review > board assumes pre commit Reviews where on fact the code is usually already > pushed, which makes the review post commit. That’s why we use feature/fix branches. The review happens before the code lands on master (or other release branch). In our git world, pre/post commit is pre/post push. Jan -- > > Robert Samuel Newson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I think we should use github instead (especially as the integration >> continues to improve). >> >> The 'upload patch file' approach for Review Board makes it a >> non-starter in my opinion. (Yes, we could insist every participant >> installs command lines tools to finesse that, but come on) >> >> B. >> >> On 18 Feb 2014, at 18:25, Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn. >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I have used review board in the past. It's easy to use but you can do >> most of it on >>> github nowadays. Just open pull requests, others can review and >> comment them. >>> >>> Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> It's been two weeks since we got our Review Board set up. But it >> looks >>>> like nobody is using it. Is this something we want to continue >> using? >>>> Does someone want to draft some documentation for it? (Or just go >>>> first and get the ball rolling?) >>>> >>>> https://reviews.apache.org/groups/couchdb/ >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > -- > Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
