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 14:47:12 GMT
On 19 February 2014 15:25, Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote:

> Yes. It’s misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>

+1


> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
> >
> > On 19 February 2014 14:49, Andy Wenk <andy@nms.de> wrote:
> >> 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
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Noah Slater
> > https://twitter.com/nslater
>
>


-- 
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