Phil,
This looks very similar to the code review tool available in GitHub
itself ... so the primary difference is in the workflow or do see an
advantage that you are reducing the number of overall commits (by using
arc?) or ???
Dale
On 10/27/2016 01:49 PM, [email protected] wrote:
For code reviews, Phabricator and Arcanist are nice. This is like
Facebook for code. Facebook uses this thing internally. As for FB,
there are "apps".
Inline image 3
Differential is the part of Phabricator for doing the reviews.
The key idea is that you cannot commit to the repo directly.
You use "arc diff" to create a "revision" that you post to the system.
You get a number for this. Not a long git commit id, but a real number
(e.g. 610).
Code review ensues, where people can put comments etc through a web
interface. Comments can be at any level: file, line of code (click and
add comment on the line).
We were doing Zend Framework 2 and so PSR-2 standards applied.
There was a check happening before even being able to submit, so be
compliant or do not pass. A pain, but ultimately catched a few bugs
that could have been nasty.
Once the review is successful, a user with the proper permissions will
do an "arc land"
Once arc land was done, the differential landed on the github repo,
and the CI could pick it up for official packaging.
All in all, it is a nice workflow when lots of people are working at
once on a code base. Also allows to limit the amount of crap ending up
in the official repo due to devs not having a clue (happened).
I used the toolset for a project where the developers where remote and
it worked well (team size: Belgium 3 people, Romania 10+).
Code was in Github private repo.
https://secure.phabricator.com/
One can look around.
HTH
Phil
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Dale Henrichs
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Guillermo,
Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?
What are your objections?
Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you
just have visions that code review could be better?
Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use
a tool that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating
the better tool:)
Dale
On 10/27/2016 05:06 AM, Guillermo Polito wrote:
I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do
one ad-hoc...
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi.
With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we
will have out of the box.
I google a bit and found these nice service
http://ghv.artzub.com.
Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.
What other online services you know to analyse github projects?
