On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Thiago Farina <tfrans...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Felipe Contreras
>> Personally I think reviews on the mailing list is far superior than
>> any other review methods. I've even blogged about it and all the
>> reasons[1]. Gerrit is better than bugzilla, but it still requires a
>> web browser, and logging in.
>>
> Requiring a web browser is a huge requirement, ham??
Yes. Today people can use any mail interface: web, console-based,
graphical. They can use Gmail clients in their phone, or IMAP, or
whatever.
Requiring everyone to use a web browser would limit the amount of ways
people can review patches. Also, not everyone has javascript enabled
in their browser (I assume Gerrit needs that).
> How come that can
> be an impediment to move forward way of this awkward way of reviewing
> patches through email?
It's not awkward, it's the most sensible way.
You just replied to my mail the same way I would reply to a patch.
> Switching to Gerrit would mean everyone would
> be using the same tool instead of anyone using its own email client
> (gmail, mutt, thunderbird, whatever...)
Yes, that's bad.
> and having to figure out git
> format-patch, git send-email (--reply-to where?).
No need to figure anything.
% git config sendemail.to git@vger.kernel.org
% git send-email @{upstream}..
Done.
> There are a lot of issues of having to use email for reviewing patches
> that I think Gerrit is a superior alternative.
There are no issues. It works for Linux, qemu, libav, ffmpeg, git, and
many other projects.
> And many people are arguing for it!
Nope, they are not.
--
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
