On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 11:39:38 PM UTC-4, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 7/13/17 9:04 PM, Mark Côté wrote:
> > It is also what newer systems
> > do today (e.g. GitHub and the full Phabricator suite)
>
> I should note that with GitHub what this means is that you get
> discussion on the PR that should have gone in the issue, with the result
> that people following the issue don't see half the relevant discussion.
> In particular, it's common to go off from "reviewing this line of code"
> to "raising questions about what the desired behavior is", which is
> squarely back in issue-land, not code-review land.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know how to solve that problem without
> designating a "central point where all discussion happens" and ensuring
> that anything outside it is mirrored there...
So I for one, tend to like to read commentary on interesting bugs inline in my
e-mail with said bug, so that I can get some context for the "why" along with
"patch created" --> "comment on patch" --> "[context of patch] why did this
line change" ---> ! Aha, I can help with context there! (or Maybe changing that
hunk of that file is interesting to me and I can provide useful feedback).
So, a few concrete suggestions on how I imagine we can meet my desire of having
patch comment/review/etc in bug, without having the downsides called out in
this thread (no deep thought on difficulty of implementation for these ideas, I
trust those reading to evaluate utility against the difficulty):
* Comments on patches get emailed to the people in the bug contact lists (using
similar X-Bugzilla Headers)
* Comments/Changes in phabricator get viewable in bugzilla directly.
- Patch Creation/Obsolescence (options below)
* New patches in patch list, like mozreview/traditional
* An integrated table that merely queries a phabricator API
* A bmo comment
* An entry inline with bmo comments to indicate phabricator patch
created/obsoleted, but without being part of bmo in any other way.
- Patch flag setting (Depends partly on solution(s) chosen above)
* Actual bmo flag flipped
* Table of phabricator reviews updated
* A bmo comment saying state of review changed
* An entry inline with bmo comments but not actually a comment
- Patch commentary
* Actual BMO comment
* A `phabricator` comment viewed in bmo (iframe/direct paste/whatever)
as a read-only thing
* A BMO comment but `reply` opens in phabricator
* A BMO comment that says "review [x] updated in phabricator: [link]"
* A inline history entry showing that a review comment happened in
phabricator, with link.
* ...etc?
The bottom line for me, is that I'd like to be able to see, at a glance, that
"stuff" happened in the review tool when I'm looking at a bug in bmo. There are
various degrees of this that could make me happier than unhappy, though I'm
aware that some of my own desires conflict directly with desires of others, and
in relative difficulty to implement/maintain.
I'd love to hear the outcome of this subthread, regardless of what choice (if
any) of what I proposed, is made.
~Justin Wood (Callek)
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
