Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-24 Thread Menno Smits
On 25 October 2016 at 10:55, Katherine Cox-Buday < katherine.cox-bu...@canonical.com> wrote: > roger peppe writes: > > > I think that review history is crucial for context on historic > > code decisions > > I wonder if we could hack a script to save the reviews as git

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-24 Thread Katherine Cox-Buday
roger peppe writes: > I think that review history is crucial for context on historic > code decisions I wonder if we could hack a script to save the reviews as git notes, e.g. https://github.com/google/git-appraise With git's ability to rewrite history, I bet this

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-24 Thread Menno Smits
On 25 October 2016 at 10:17, Horacio Duran wrote: > Shouldn't we leave it for historic purposes? > > ​Will it really get used? My bet is that the project's commit history will be enough.​ -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-24 Thread Horacio Duran
Shouldn't we leave it for historic purposes? On Monday, 24 October 2016, Menno Smits wrote: > The votes are in: Github 8, Reviewboard 5. It looks like we stick with > Github Reviews. > > I'm going to email some people now about tearing down the Reviewboard > instance.

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-24 Thread Menno Smits
The votes are in: Github 8, Reviewboard 5. It looks like we stick with Github Reviews. I'm going to email some people now about tearing down the Reviewboard instance. On 15 October 2016 at 06:57, Casey Marshall wrote: > +1, as I work on many other Github projects

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Casey Marshall
+1, as I work on many other Github projects besides Juju and it's familiar. It's not perfect by any means but I can work with it. I thought the ReviewBoard we had was pretty ugly and buggy, but it was reasonably easy to use. Gerrit is cleaner and clearer to me -- though I feel like Gerrit is also

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Andrew McDermott
On 14 October 2016 at 16:26, Mick Gregg wrote: > I would probably chose gerrit over either, but that's not the question > today. > Oooh, yes to gerrit. +2 -- Andrew McDermott Juju Core Sapphire team --

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Reed O'Brien
+1 I expect there will be updates and improvements to GH reviews over time. e.g. the 'show notes' checkbox to hide the notes when looking at the changes. I don't recall seeing that last week. I think gitlab's funding and cadence if putting pressure on GH to improve their UI and feature set. They

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Mick Gregg
+1 Perhaps I'm too new to understand what rb truly offers, but one less tool has been noticeably better for me, and I haven't felt any pain in gh. I would probably chose gerrit over either, but that's not the question today. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:10:56PM -0300, Horacio Duran wrote: > +1 to

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Dimiter Naydenov
+1, Nate said what I was thinking :) On 10/14/2016 05:34 PM, Nate Finch wrote: > +1 > > Keeping the PR and reviews together really makes it easier for me to > keep track of what's going on with a PR. It's also really nice not > having to context switch out of github for every single PR. > >

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Horacio Duran
+1 to Github, I prefer the papercuts of githubs to the swordcuts from reviewboard. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Dimiter Naydenov < dimiter.nayde...@canonical.com> wrote: > +1, Nate said what I was thinking :) > > On 10/14/2016 05:34 PM, Nate Finch wrote: > > +1 > > > > Keeping the PR and

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread roger peppe
[from canonical email address this time] On 14 October 2016 at 12:45, Adam Collard wrote: > Not sure I get a vote, but -1 > > You're running an old version of ReviewBoard (2.0.12 released in January > 2015) and many of the issues I think you've been hitting are fixed

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread roger peppe
On 14 October 2016 at 12:45, Adam Collard wrote: > Not sure I get a vote, but -1 > > You're running an old version of ReviewBoard (2.0.12 released in January > 2015) and many of the issues I think you've been hitting are fixed in later > revisions. Latest stable is

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Adam Collard
Not sure I get a vote, but -1 You're running an old version of ReviewBoard (2.0.12 released in January 2015) and many of the issues I think you've been hitting are fixed in later revisions. Latest stable is 2.5.6.1, 3.0.x is under active development and brings a chunk of new UI improvements.

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread Michael Foord
0 On 13/10/16 23:44, 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

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread roger peppe
+1. Although github reviews are by no means perfect, reviewboard is worse. It loses draft comments if you click in the wrong place; it takes two page reloads to be able to reply to a comment; it doesn't work well on mobile platforms; it doesn't understand file renames, and the comments are

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-14 Thread James Tunnicliffe
-1 On 14 October 2016 at 02:47, Tim Penhey wrote: > -1, like Menno I was initially quite hopeful for the github reviews. > > My main concerns are around easily having a list to pull from, and being > able to see status, comments on a single dashboard. > > Tim > > On

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-13 Thread Tim Penhey
-1, like Menno I was initially quite hopeful for the github reviews. My main concerns are around easily having a list to pull from, and being able to see status, comments on a single dashboard. Tim On 14/10/16 11:44, Menno Smits wrote: We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-13 Thread Menno Smits
-1 I was really excited by Github Reviews initially but after using it for a while I've switched my position. On 14 October 2016 at 11:44, 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

Re: Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-13 Thread Ian Booth
-1000 :-) 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

Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

2016-10-13 Thread Menno Smits
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 thoughts. - +1