On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 5:53 AM Menno Smits <menno.sm...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Some of us probably got a little excited (me included). There should be > discussion and a clear announcement before we make a signigicant change to > our process. The tech board meeting is today/tonight so we'll discuss it > there as per Rick's email. Please contribute to this thread if you haven't > already and have strong opinions either way on the topic. > We discussed Github reviews vs. Reviewboard at the tech board meeting today, and we all agreed that we should go ahead with a trial for 2 weeks. There are pros and cons to each; neither is perfect. You can find the main points of discussion in the tech board agenda. Please give it a shot and provide your criticisms so we decide on the best path forward at the end of the trial. Cheers, Andrew Interestingly our Github/RB integration seems to have broken a little since > Github made these changes. The links to Reviewboard on pull requests aren't > getting inserted any more. If we decide to stay with RB > > On 21 September 2016 at 05:54, Rick Harding <rick.hard...@canonical.com> > wrote: > >> I spoke with Alexis today about this and it's on her list to check with >> her folks on this. The tech board has been tasked with he decision, so >> please feel free to shoot a copy of your opinions their way. As you say, on >> the one hand it's a big impact on the team, but it's also a standard >> developer practice that not everyone will agree with so I'm sure the tech >> board is a good solution to limiting the amount of bike-shedding and to >> have some multi-mind consensus. >> >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:52 PM Katherine Cox-Buday < >> katherine.cox-bu...@canonical.com> wrote: >> >>> Seems like a good thing to do would be to ensure the tech board doesn't >>> have any objections and then put it to a vote since it's more a property of >>> the team and not the codebase. >>> >>> I just want some consistency until a decision is made. E.g. "we will be >>> trying out GitHub reviews for the next two weeks; all reviews should be >>> done on there". >>> >>> -- >>> Katherine >>> >>> Nate Finch <nate.fi...@canonical.com> writes: >>> >>> > Can we try reviews on github for a couple weeks? Seems like we'll >>> > never know if it's sufficient if we don't try it. And there's no setup >>> > cost, which is nice. >>> > >>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM Katherine Cox-Buday >>> > <katherine.cox-bu...@canonical.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > I see quite a few PRs that are being reviewed in GitHub and not >>> > ReviewBoard. I really don't care where we do them, but can we >>> > please pick a direction and move forward? And until then, can we >>> > stick to our previous decision and use RB? With people using both >>> > it's much more difficult to tell what's been reviewed and what >>> > hasn't. >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Katherine >>> > >>> > Nate Finch <nate.fi...@canonical.com> writes: >>> > >>> > > In case you missed it, Github rolled out a new review process. >>> > It >>> > > basically works just like reviewboard does, where you start a >>> > review, >>> > > batch up comments, then post the review as a whole, so you don't >>> > just >>> > > write a bunch of disconnected comments (and get one email per >>> > review, >>> > > not per comment). The only features reviewboard has is the edge >>> > case >>> > > stuff that we rarely use: like using rbt to post a review from a >>> > > random diff that is not connected directly to a github PR. I >>> > think >>> > > that is easy enough to give up in order to get the benefit of >>> > not >>> > > needing an entirely separate system to handle reviews. >>> > > >>> > > I made a little test review on one PR here, and the UX was >>> > almost >>> > > exactly like working in reviewboard: >>> > > https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/6234 >>> > > >>> > > There may be important edge cases I'm missing, but I think it's >>> > worth >>> > > looking into. >>> > > >>> > > -Nate >>> >>> -- >>> Juju-dev mailing list >>> Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >>> >> >> -- >> Juju-dev mailing list >> Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >> >> > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
