On 02/14/2015 09:21 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
Hi Mads,
I had a look at the commits from Unity at
https://bitbucket.org/Unity-Technologies/kallithea/commits/all
and find following commits interesting:
https://bitbucket.org/Unity-Technologies/kallithea/commits/1d897e8dfb7990553fc0bb1767f3fd5e00d74e8d
unity: pullrequests: don't add repo owner as reviewer in all PRs
This may not be desired by all, but could be transformed as follows:
provide for each repository a configurable list of default reviewers.
By default, this list would be empty. A user wishing the repo owner as
default reviewer can do so freely, along with any other 'core
reviewers'.
I think this is an area where organizations will have different work flows.
For a starter, many repositories in organizations do not have a single
owner.
For our main repository we have some (so far hardcoded) customizations
that based on the PR diffstat finds relevant owners / experts of the
changed areas (and branch names) and suggests adding them as reviewers.
I doubt it is feasible to implement something that can solve all needs
just with configuration. Some/most requirements are so complex that they
need coding if they should be formalized / automated. Some needs in this
area are perhaps better solved with good documentation, examples and
framework for customizing Kallithea.
Still, I agree that it is better to not hardcode that the repo owner is
added as reviewer. That is a more clean slate for creating custom work
flows.
Something like what you describe with a 'favourite list' can perhaps be
a good generic improvement that can come next.
What do others say; would you like to have the "don't add repo owner as
reviewer in all PRs" change in Kallithea?
https://bitbucket.org/Unity-Technologies/kallithea/commits/4c228d11097b25133932669f11c6c58701bfd6af
changelog: change default view to 100, max to 2000
The current list of 20 is indeed pretty short. Similar for the list of
pull requests of a repository (currently paged at 10).
This could be merged as-is in mainline, no?
Sure. Seems reasonable and not so controversial.
https://bitbucket.org/Unity-Technologies/kallithea/commits/39576ff556bf355fa023c4b450318f72e1645ba3
comments: linkify hashes and issue tracker references
Is there any reason why we could not mainline this one?
It depends on the "disable RST" change. It would have to be done quite
differently if it should coexist with RST or other fancy markup.
Obviously, I would like to upstream both changes but I guess it would be
a bit controversial.
/Mads
_______________________________________________
kallithea-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/kallithea-general
