Github Reviews vs Reviewboard

[James Tunnicliffe]

-1

On 14 October 2016 at 02:47, Tim Penhey <tim.penhey at canonical.com> 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 14/10/16 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 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 means you prefer Github Reviews
>>   * -1 means you prefer Reviewboard
>>   * 0 means you don't mind.
>>
>> If you don't mind which review system we use there's no need to reply
>> unless you want to voice some opinions.
>>
>> The voting period starts *now* and ends my*EOD next Friday (October 21)*.
>>
>> As a refresher, here are the concerns raised for each option.
>>
>> *Github Reviews*
>>
>>   * Comments disrupt the flow of the code and can't be minimised,
>>     hindering readability.
>>   * Comments can't be marked as done making it hard to see what's still
>>     to be taken care of.
>>   * There's no way to distinguish between a problem and a comment.
>>   * There's no summary of issues raised. You need to scroll through the
>>     often busy discussion page.
>>   * There's no indication of which PRs have been reviewed from the pull
>>     request index page nor is it possible to see which PRs have been
>>     approved or otherwise.
>>   * It's hard to see when a review has been updated.
>>
>> *Reviewboard*
>>
>>   * Another piece of infrastructure for us to maintain
>>   * Higher barrier to entry for newcomers and outside contributors
>>   * Occasionally misses Github pull requests (likely a problem with our
>>     integration so is fixable)
>>   * Poor handling of deleted and renamed files
>>   * Falls over with very large diffs
>>   * 1990's looks :)
>>   * May make future integration of tools which work with Github into our
>>     process more difficult (e.g. static analysis or automated review
>> tools)
>>
>> There has been talk of evaluating other review tools such as Gerrit and
>> that may still happen. For now, let's decide between the two options we
>> have recent experience with.
>>
>> - Menno
>>
>>
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev