couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Wenk <a...@nms.de>
Subject Re: Review Board
Date Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:49:38 GMT
On 19 February 2014 14:15, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:

>
> On 19 Feb 2014, at 13:51 , Garren Smith <garren.smith@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Robert here. Github integration is getting really good now
> and its so easy to review a pull request with Github. I think we should
> rather use github.
>
> +1
>

also +1 for github ... Humbedooh does magic things :)



>  >
> > On 19 Feb 2014, at 2:49 PM, Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> We intend to review work before merging to master, which is why we have
> an account on Review Board in the first place, to see if it can help.
> >>
> >> Given the level of integration with github now, I think we can and
> should use pull requests for intra-team work just like we already do for
> requests from outside of the group with commit bits.
> >>
> >> B.
> >>
> >> On 19 Feb 2014, at 12:45, Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn. <
> stuff@meredrica.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> That's also how we did it. It seems the most sensible way to handle
> reviews.
> >>>
> >>> I would really encourage you all to try reviews, they are a great way
> to improve code quality. They are quick to create and quick to read. A
> typical review takes less than 20 minutes.
> >>>
> >>> Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 19 Feb 2014, at 03:13 , Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn.
> >>>> <stuff@meredrica.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The patch creation is simple but the real  problem is the culture.
> >>>> Review board assumes pre commit Reviews where on fact the code is
> >>>> usually already pushed, which makes the review post commit.
> >>>>
> >>>> That’s why we use feature/fix branches. The review happens before
the
> >>>> code lands on master (or other release branch). In our git world,
> >>>> pre/post commit is pre/post push.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we should use github instead (especially as the integration
> >>>>>> continues to improve).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The 'upload patch file' approach for Review Board makes it a
> >>>>>> non-starter in my opinion. (Yes, we could insist every participant
> >>>>>> installs command lines tools to finesse that, but come on)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> B.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 18 Feb 2014, at 18:25, Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn.
> >>>>>> <stuff@meredrica.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have used review board in the past. It's easy to use but
you can
> >>>> do
> >>>>>> most of it on
> >>>>>>> github nowadays. Just open pull requests, others can review
and
> >>>>>> comment them.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's been two weeks since we got our Review Board set
up. But it
> >>>>>> looks
> >>>>>>>> like nobody is using it. Is this something we want to
continue
> >>>>>> using?
> >>>>>>>> Does someone want to draft some documentation for it?
(Or just go
> >>>>>>>> first and get the ball rolling?)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://reviews.apache.org/groups/couchdb/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Andy Wenk
Hamburg - Germany
RockIt!

http://www.couchdb-buch.de
http://www.pg-praxisbuch.de

GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588

https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message