+1 It will be more convenient to use Github PR. 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
> +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to > committers... > > Jan Hentschel <jan.hentsc...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:11写道： > > > +1 > > > > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard. > > > > From: Peter Somogyi <psomo...@apache.org> > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org> > > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM > > To: HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews > > > > +1 > > > > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only > > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment. > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org > <mailto: > > ndimi...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > > Heya, > > > > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code > review > > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a > Phabricator > > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have > > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a > > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch > > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting > > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling > around > > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with. > > > > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This > > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably > others) > > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Thanks, > > Nick > > > > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing > > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard > > > > > > >
