incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Kinsella <>
Subject Re: Patches review
Date Mon, 18 Jun 2012 20:22:30 GMT

On Jun 18, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Ewan Mellor wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fred Wittekind []
>> ...
>>> Personally, I've always submitted patches via attaching them to bug
>>>> reports.  Works well when I find a bug in something, don't have time
>> to
>>>> wait on anyone else to fix it, so I fix it myself, attach it to a
>> bug
>>>> report, and hope it's in the next release so I don't have to deal
>> with
>>>> it again.  Works pretty good with most open source projects.
>>>> Fred Wittekind
>>> So I have seen a lot of folks who use this approach, but that
>>> typically means that the mailing list gets cced on every action in
>> the
>>> bugtracker. (mailing lists are where everything happens in Apache
>>> projects) We are already on track to hit 1,000 messages on this list
>>> alone this month - are we sure we want to add Jira traffic to that
>>> volume?
>>> --David
>> If we don't use the project's bug tracker to track the progress of bugs
>> and there patches, doesn't that defeat the purpose of having it?
>> Keeping the patch file attachments in Jira would keep those file
>> attachments out of the mailing list (reduction of traffic), and we
>> wouldn't run into MTA/MUAs mangling them.
>> If someone makes a comment in Jira, then CCs the mailing list, that
>> isn't any more mailing list traffic than sending to the same thing to
>> the mailing list alone.
> Hi,
> I want to keep this thread alive, because this is an important decision in front of us,
and the thread died on Wednesday without getting very far.
> I think we're all agreed that we want to get patches out of email and into a tool that's
better designed for peer review, automated test, and merge.  So that's the decision that's
ahead of us -- what tool do we want to use for this?
> In my opinion, Jira is a _fantastic_ bug tracker, but it's a poor tool for reviewing
patches.  The best systems that I have seen will use a dedicated review tool, and will reflect
details back to the bug tracker for archive.  That way, anyone looking at the bug can find
the review discussion and see when a fix was merged, but the actual review itself can happen
in a tool designed for the job.
> I know of two decent options: Gerrit from the Google Android team, and ReviewBoard. 
I've seen Gerrit used very successfully in the past.  I don't know anything about ReviewBoard,
other than the fact that there is an instance hosted at  (It was also
down last week, which is a concern, but I'm sure we could address any instability problems
if we wanted to depend on it.)
> Does anyone have any other tools that we should look at, or comments on either Gerrit
or ReviewBoard?
> The next step from here would be to pick one or two to evaluate, and put together a workflow
for patch acceptance that we can all agree on.

Atlassian's Crucible is decent, and would tie in with Jira pretty well…

View raw message