I've used both PRs and Review Boards for doc changes. The Review Board's targeted reviewer list, as Bruce points out, is a plus. It would be great if PRs could do that.
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:28 AM, John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > +1 to Bruce's comments. > > PRs are for contributors that do not have commit privileges. ReviewBoard > is a tool for "reviewing" changes. > > However, what is also common practice on open source projects, even for > committers, is to create a topic branch containing the commit with the > desired changes (labeled with an appropriate JIRA ticket + description). > Then a reviewer can then pick up the topic branch, review the code changes, > polish things up and even merge the topic branch back into the mainline > (e.g. develop) and close the ticket. IDEs, more than ReviewBoard/FishEye, > etc, have better tooling for reviewing diffs, making change, running tests, > etc. > > -John > > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Bruce Schuchardt <bschucha...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > One thing I find confusing in PRs is whether the person submitting the > > request is a committer or not. Non-committers need someone to merge the > PR > > while committers are just looking for a review and will merge the changes > > to develop themselves. > > > > I also don't see any way to push a PR to specific individuals for review. > > In Reviewboard there is a nice queue of pending reviews that I can go > > through. On github they're all mixed together and it's difficult to tell > > whether any of them are relevant to me. > > > > I like the idea of a single source of history for reviews but I don't > much > > like the idea of having to create PRs on a read-only system and then > merge > > my changes to ASF's repo. Being able to commit directly seems like a > > committer perk that your idea would take away from us. > > > > > > On 6/7/17 6:42 PM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > > >> All, > >> > >> I would like to discuss transitioning all code reviews to pull requests > >> over using review board. For non-committer community members we ask them > >> to > >> make pull requests against the mirrored GitHub repo. Some committers use > >> pull requests for their own work reviews while others use review board. > I > >> propose that we just use on and that the one we use be pull requests. It > >> would give us a single source of history for reviews, a single model to > >> understand for reviewers and committers and keep workflow consistent > with > >> all contributors, committers or not. > >> > >> -Jake > >> > >> > > > > > -- > -John > john.blum10101 (skype) >
