I think review board is definitely a good practice but we probably dont have to make it mandatory. We can definitely update the howtocontribute twiki on uploading to review board, if the patch is big enough. I usually dont use review board. I download the patch and use eclipse to see what changes have been made (mostly because sometimes I just edit the patch myself).
thanks mahadev On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Fournier, Camille F. <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it's great to encourage people to use it if they feel the need or > desire. Certainly for longer patches (new features especially) where you have > a lot of comments to make, reviewboard is useful. However, everyone has their > own workflow. For me, I always download every patch I review and inspect it > in my editor, along with running a subset of related tests. If I then have > comments to make about individual lines, I'll often upload it to RB to make > the comments, but frequently the comments are either of a more general nature > (this doesn't solve the bug it purports to address) or there are no comments > necessary. Experience has shown me that trying to do good code reviews > without actually looking at the patch in the context of my IDE is error > > What I'm not clear on is why you want to make a rule that we must do this. Is > there some larger problem you see that you think this would help us solve? > Are reviews not transparent enough? Is the process too slow? Are we missing > errors because we don't have good review tools? You seem to be proposing a > solution to a problem that no one has complained about. > > Anyway, we should certainly update the wiki to explain how to use RB and when > it is recommended to do so (such as when proposing a new feature). I think > you should be able to do this, if you are willing. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Koch [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 5:23 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Make ReviewBoard obligatory? > > Hi, > > as Camille suggested[1], I've used ReviewBoard in the last weeks for a couple > of issues. I believe it's a very good tool and helps a lot. Actually I ask > myself, how one can do an effective code review without such a tool? It's kind > of time-consuming to download the patch file, inspect it in an editor and post > comments to jira, copy and pasting code lines or typing line numbers. > > What do you think? Would it be good to strongly encourage the use of > ReviewBoard for every change whose patch file is longer then ~30 lines? I also > think, that the current process of using ReviewBoard is time-consuming. But if > that should be the reason to reject a review tool, then you might have a look > to my suggestion of using Gerrit at the ASF[2]. > > I scanned the wiki[3][4] and didn't find ReviewBoard mentioned. ZOOKEEPER-1172 > is an example of an (I believe) new contributor, who didn't know about > ReviewBoard and also didn't correctly fill the ReviewRequest. I believe that > the review process could become easier for the committers, if people would > default to open review requests. > > [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.hadoop.zookeeper.devel/10095 > [2] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.infrastructure.devel/1361 > [3] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToContribute > [4] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/Committing+changes > > Regards, > > Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro >
