[from canonical email address this time]
On 14 October 2016 at 12:45, Adam Collard <adam.coll...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Not sure I get a vote, but -1
>
> You're running an old version of ReviewBoard (2.0.12 released in January
> 2015) and many of the issues I think you've been hitting are fixed in later
> revisions. Latest stable is 2.5.6.1, 3.0.x is under active development and
> brings a chunk of new UI improvements.
>
> Release notes for 2.5
>
> 3.0 demo site
I'm still not convinced.
Even 3.0 still deletes draft comments without so much as a by-your-leave
when you double-click somewhere else in the text. And because it doesn't use
real text entry boxes, the Lazarus plugin, my usual saviour in such cases,
doesn't work. I've lost far too much time to this in the past.
Replying to a comment still involves a page reload and associated lost context.
I can't see anything in the 2.5 release notes about fixing behaviour on file
move/rename, though I may well have missed it.
And not being able to deal with really large PRs is a definite issue too (not
that github is better there).
cheers,
rog.
On 14 October 2016 at 12:45, Adam Collard <adam.coll...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Not sure I get a vote, but -1
>
> You're running an old version of ReviewBoard (2.0.12 released in January
> 2015) and many of the issues I think you've been hitting are fixed in later
> revisions. Latest stable is 2.5.6.1, 3.0.x is under active development and
> brings a chunk of new UI improvements.
>
> Release notes for 2.5
>
> 3.0 demo site
>
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 at 12:34 Michael Foord <michael.fo...@canonical.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 0
>>
>>
>> On 13/10/16 23:44, Menno Smits wrote:
>>
>> We've been trialling Github Reviews for some time now and it's time to
>> decide whether we stick with it or go back to Reviewboard.
>>
>> We're going to have a vote. If you have an opinion on the issue please
>> reply to this email with a +1, 0 or -1, optionally followed by any further
>> thoughts.
>>
>> +1 means you prefer Github Reviews
>> -1 means you prefer Reviewboard
>> 0 means you don't mind.
>>
>> If you don't mind which review system we use there's no need to reply
>> unless you want to voice some opinions.
>>
>> The voting period starts now and ends my EOD next Friday (October 21).
>>
>> As a refresher, here are the concerns raised for each option.
>>
>> Github Reviews
>>
>> Comments disrupt the flow of the code and can't be minimised, hindering
>> readability.
>> Comments can't be marked as done making it hard to see what's still to be
>> taken care of.
>> There's no way to distinguish between a problem and a comment.
>> There's no summary of issues raised. You need to scroll through the often
>> busy discussion page.
>> There's no indication of which PRs have been reviewed from the pull
>> request index page nor is it possible to see which PRs have been approved or
>> otherwise.
>> It's hard to see when a review has been updated.
>>
>> Reviewboard
>>
>> Another piece of infrastructure for us to maintain
>> Higher barrier to entry for newcomers and outside contributors
>> Occasionally misses Github pull requests (likely a problem with our
>> integration so is fixable)
>> Poor handling of deleted and renamed files
>> Falls over with very large diffs
>> 1990's looks :)
>> May make future integration of tools which work with Github into our
>> process more difficult (e.g. static analysis or automated review tools)
>>
>> There has been talk of evaluating other review tools such as Gerrit and
>> that may still happen. For now, let's decide between the two options we have
>> recent experience with.
>>
>> - Menno
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Juju-dev mailing list
>> Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>
--
Juju-dev mailing list
Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
