Denis,

Contributors will have to start a review on branch or pull request manually
(a couple of clicks really), then attach an URL to the JIRA ticket.
Example: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4116

> are there any examples of Apache projects that used some 3rd party tool
for review process
Some projects use Crucible: https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/
Apache Hive used Phabricator in the past.


Mike,

> Why not / what is wrong with GitHub?
Nothing is wrong with GitHub, I think it is the second best option.
Still, Upsource is much nicer, so I'd like to explore this possibility.

> commercial tool I have to pay for
They provide open source license. We license TeamCity this way.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Michael André Pearce <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Why not / what is wrong with GitHub?
>
> Code is there anyhow...
>
> I've found this seems to be the way a lot of projects have gone.
>
> It allows me to review the code without checkout
>
> I can comment inline with a pr or code commit
>
> I can fork a project to my own space and create a pr back to the main repo
>
> It updates when I make a commit
>
> Supports multiple reviewers.
>
> Eco system of bots
>
> It doesn't tie me into a commercial ide tool (I love IntelliJ like the
> next person, but appreciate it is a commercial tool I have to pay for for
> all the bells and whistles)
>
> Rgds
> Mike
>
> > On 14 Nov 2016, at 17:03, Denis Magda <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Pavel,
> >
> > How will the contribution process be affected if the community switches
> to Upsource? Will Upsource introduce additional steps for those who want to
> ask someone to review a branch or the tool simply intercepts all the
> pull-requests automatically?
> >
> > Cos, Raul, Others,
> >
> > How this intention is aligned with Apache at all? In you experience, are
> there any examples of Apache projects that used some 3rd party tool for
> review process?
> >
> > —
> > Denis
> >
> >> On Nov 14, 2016, at 4:08 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Igniters,
> >>
> >> We have set up Upsource code review tool at
> >> http://reviews.ignite.apache.org/
> >>
> >> I propose to evaluate it and see if it works for us.
> >>
> >>
> >> * Why?
> >> Current JIRA-based process is not very efficient. Anyone who have used a
> >> review tool will probably agree:
> >>
> >> - No need to switch branches locally and interrupt your current work.
> You
> >> can see the code in one click.
> >> - All current reviews are easily accessible
> >> - Multiple reviewers
> >> - Much better discussions: comments are right in the code; each point
> can
> >> be discussed and accepted separately
> >> - Integrates with IDEA - open the diff in IDEA in one click, or see the
> >> reviews there without opening the browser at all
> >>
> >>
> >> * Why Upsource?
> >> I've evaluated a bunch of tools (CodeCollaborator, ReviewBoard,
> >> Phabricator, Crucible),
> >> and Upsource looks like the best fit for us:
> >> - PR-based code reviews. This is a major advantage: review for a PR can
> be
> >> created in one click, and it updates automatically when you push more
> >> commits (fix review issues)
> >> - Good Java support and IDEA integration
> >> - Good performance (our code base is big, and tools like Crucible really
> >> struggle with it)
> >>
> >>
> >> Thoughts and suggestions are welcome.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Pavel
> >
>

Reply via email to