Certainly can appreciate that sentiment, Tony. I have a pretty good flow doing reviews that kind of abstracts away the fact that it is a PR versus just another branch/remote. However, when it comes to code reviews, the vast majority of my effort happens in GitHub at the moment. I believe there are some facilities in ASF to do this, but nothing that has quite the same integration.
My primary interest, which I think this provides, is the ability to close out PRs. It's fairly minor, but having to reach out to the contributor when I forget the magical incantation or providing empty commits that do so for PRs that are no longer valid would be a nice bit of functionality, in my view. On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > Worth considering, this twitter post has been circulating the blogosphere: > https://twitter.com/agentdero/status/889582259522736128 > > I'd like to ensure we don't forget other means of providing patches > (attaching a patch to a ticket). While github is convenient to some, using > it as the sole source of providing contributions may be off-putting to > some. > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm a strong +0. I don't think think it is a huge step forward, but it > > isn't a step back either. > > > > On Jul 28, 2017 5:42 PM, "Andy LoPresto" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> +1 to enable gitbox. > >> > >> Andy LoPresto > >> [email protected] > >> *[email protected] <[email protected]>* > >> PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > >> > >> On Jul 28, 2017, at 12:56 PM, Matt Burgess <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> +1, I meant to bring this up after I saw the conversation on the Apache > >> Streams list. Seems like a great improvement to the workflow! > >> > >> > >> On Jul 28, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> +1 to move to gitbox > >> > >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Aldrin Piri <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Excellent. Thanks for the input, Suneel. The before and after links are > >> especially helpful. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Suneel Marthi <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> We migrated Apache OpenNLP to gitbox (beginning of July) and even had a > >> release immediately. > >> > >> Yes, the PR commit workflow is lot simpler now with gitbox (just a > button > >> click). > >> > >> I would definitely recommend moving Nifi to gitbox, if anything it makes > >> > >> a > >> > >> committer's life lot easier. > >> > >> > >> Before Gitbox, this is how PRs were merged: > >> > >> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html > >> > >> After Gitbox, this is how it will be: > >> > >> http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Aldrin Piri <[email protected]> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> Hey folks, > >> > >> I saw mention on the Incubator general mailing list about Gitbox [1]. > >> > >> From > >> > >> that message it seems like it would help considerably with some of the > >> maintenance tasks we perform on the repository. Has anyone in the > >> community used it on another project and have any opinions on it? > >> > >> Doing some searching, I was able to find some discussion from the > >> > >> Accumulo > >> > >> project [2]. > >> > >> With my very basic understanding of the service, it seems like it would > >> > >> be > >> > >> a welcomed bit of functionality. > >> > >> Is this something we think is worth exploring further and enabling on > >> > >> our > >> > >> repositories? > >> > >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Znkiyqnxqzryecv > >> [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- > >> GitBox-td21160.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >
