https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69445
Antoine "hashar" Musso <has...@free.fr> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |has...@free.fr
--- Comment #2 from Antoine "hashar" Musso <has...@free.fr> ---
Would it make sense to use git / phabricator ? We will have to convince the
community that a pre commit review workflow is a good thing, but that would let
us run validation tests and deploy on some staging area before rolling changes
to production.
I am very skeptical at our ability to code and maintain a review system in
MediaWiki, we have past experiences:
- CodeReview extension for svn could have been nice if we had the ability to
devote time to it, it turned out to be simpler to delegate the software to
third party (Gerrit, soon Phabricator).
- FlaggedRevs which would let one validate revisions before they were made
public. I don't think anyone regret it. I found the workflow / UI etc terrible
and never understood how it worked.
Also, we could use such a review system for Gadgets and LUA modules. When
writing, versionning and collaborating on code, ones need a version control
system. git comes to mind.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
