We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now and it's time to
decide whether we stick with it or go back to Reviewboard.

We're going to have a vote. If you have an opinion on the issue please
reply to this email with a +1, 0 or -1, optionally followed by any further

   - +1 means you prefer Github Reviews
   - -1 means you prefer Reviewboard
   - 0 means you don't mind.

If you don't mind which review system we use there's no need to reply
unless you want to voice some opinions.

The voting period starts *now* and ends my* EOD next Friday (October 21)*.

As a refresher, here are the concerns raised for each option.

*Github Reviews*

   - Comments disrupt the flow of the code and can't be minimised,
   hindering readability.
   - Comments can't be marked as done making it hard to see what's still to
   be taken care of.
   - There's no way to distinguish between a problem and a comment.
   - There's no summary of issues raised. You need to scroll through the
   often busy discussion page.
   - There's no indication of which PRs have been reviewed from the pull
   request index page nor is it possible to see which PRs have been approved
   or otherwise.
   - It's hard to see when a review has been updated.


   - Another piece of infrastructure for us to maintain
   - Higher barrier to entry for newcomers and outside contributors
   - Occasionally misses Github pull requests (likely a problem with our
   integration so is fixable)
   - Poor handling of deleted and renamed files
   - Falls over with very large diffs
   - 1990's looks :)
   - May make future integration of tools which work with Github into our
   process more difficult (e.g. static analysis or automated review tools)

There has been talk of evaluating other review tools such as Gerrit and
that may still happen. For now, let's decide between the two options we
have recent experience with.

- Menno
Juju-dev mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 

Reply via email to