On 14/10/16 08:44, Menno Smits wrote:
> 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: