On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Klaim J. Lamotte <mjkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am considering using this tool but I have some questions to clarify
> ReviewBoard usage.
> Before the questions, just a quick note: the website states
> In-development: 1.7 RC
> Which is not very logical and don't really feel professional either... :)
Just a bug in how it computes it that got introduced. The site's being
rewritten but I'll backport this fix.
> 0. The context I would use this is:
> - I'm working alone for now
> - I have some friends who can help by reviewing the code
> - until now I just gave them access to the source code but it's not
> perfect to do reviews
> In this context, is there some specific feature you think would appeal
> to me in ReviewBoard?
I find with changes I'm writing, getting another pair of eyes really helps
to catch mistakes I've made. By putting code up for someone to review, even
if they're not writing code for the product, they may see something I
missed, or find a better way to do something I did. Or they might learn
something themselves, get a feel for my coding style, etc., which is useful
if they ever start writing code for it.
> 1. Can I use Mercurial and Git with 1.7.1? It is not clear from the
> documentation, I just see some discussions implying I can, but I didn't
> find explicit statements.
Both are supported. And many more.
> 2. I'm using Rhodecode to manage my repositories. It have basic review
> support apparently. How does ReviewBoard compare?
I don't know Rhodecode. I played around with it for a few minutes to see
how it compares. It looks pretty basic and standard so far. Here's what we
seem to have that it doesn't:
1) Side-by-side diffs. Some people like the top-down look, but a
side-by-side means we can do inline comments that span lines, better
indication of what changed within a line, and more.
2) Syntax highlighting. We syntax-highlight the source code, which makes it
easier to read.
3) In-line diffing. If a line of code changed (marked as a "replace"),
we'll show exactly what changed so you don't have to read the entire line.
It looks like Rhodecode is trying to do this, but it doesn't seem to work
4) Function/class context. We show you where you are in a diff. That is,
what function or class precedes the code you're looking at.
5) Diff expansion. We start off by showing you just the changed regions,
with some unchanged lines surrounding it. You can expand the collapsed
areas all at once, by 20 lines at a time, or expand up to the nearest
function or class.
6) Move detection. We can show you when a block of code moves within a
file without being changed. Useful with large changes when you're moving
7) Issue toggling. When someone leaves a comment, they can mark it as an
opened issue, which basically is a TODO item for you to fix. Makes ti
easier to separate general discussion from things you need to fix.
8) Image commenting. If you upload an image (screenshot or something),
people can make comments right on that. We're working to expand this to
other types of files as wel.
9) All comments across all files made by a user during a review are grouped
together into a single box. All discussions about those comments go there.
Every review gets its own box. It's easier to stay organized this way,
rather than just comments inline in code in places.
10) Posting a review request to Review Board is one command on the command
line, It can be done without pushing code to a central repository, allowing
for pre-commit reviews. More scripts are coming, and we have a full API
(REST API, and soon a Python API) for writing custom integration.
11) Extension support. While new, we've made Review Board extensible so
that other people, companies, and even us can provide loadable extensions
to enhance the feature set of Review Board without having to modify Review
There are other things we do, but I'll stop there.
> 3. How does ReviewBoard compare to Phabricator's review system and
> Atlassian's one? So far I have a hard time seeing any real difference other
> than the cost.
> The problem is that I didn't use any such tool so far so I don't know
> what kind of feature are good or not.
I'm told Phabricator makes it really easy to include pictures of cats and
Jean-Luc Picard facepalm images. So if that's important, you can go with
them. I haven't heard anything else about how their system is to use.
I haven't used Atlassian's product. All I have there is second-hand
knowledge. I hear managers really like it because of all the tracking it
can do based on the required fields for users. I've heard from developers
that Review Board was easier for them to integrate into their workflow. I
think it's just up to what your needs are. There is a big cost difference,
What we don't do is constantly compare our feature list to that of other
code review tools in an effort to improve Review Board. We take the stance
that this isn't a feature list war, and we'd rather focus on what we think
improves our own product. We use Review Board daily, and it originally
started because *we* needed a better tool.
One thing I can guarantee is that we work hard to support the product. We
stay active with our community of users, and we try hard to solve any
problems that come up, think about workflows that would make their lives
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at