On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 19:41:31 CEST, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
D is really important to me since it makes it harder to contribute to non hardcore git users; it took me days to start understanding Qt's gerrit and i am still not sure i understand it fully, with reviewboard i do git diff and use the web to upload a patch, as simple as it gets.
Please take your time to try out KDE's Gerrit and don't judge it based on your experience with Qt's Gerrit (in fact, try to forget that one if possible). There's been more than two years of development which went into the version which we use, and this effort is IMHO quite visible.
As a random data point, I've had two newcomers (one of them a GCI student) submitting their first patch ever through Gerrit within 15 minutes after I asked them to use Gerrit, with no prior experience whatsoever. I'm pretty sure that the GCI students in general aren't considered an etalon of quality.
Also, uploading a patch with Gerrit is a matter of `git push gerrit HEAD:refs/for/master`. Are you suggesting that this is harder than `git format-patch origin/master` and uploading the resulting file manually?
And yes, i know people complain about reviewboard, but that is because it's the tool we use, if we used gerrit, we would probably get complains too. I want to make sure we're not investing time in what at the end is most probably a zero sum height.
Right, I believe that one. As a project maintainer though, I can say that Gerrit does make my life much easier -- being able to tests patch series myself by a single `git pull` is *so* different to the experience of fetching patches by hand from RB (and undoing the occasional breakage). Also, there's no early CI feedback with RB, and nobody is neither working on this, not had announced any plans to work on this topic during the past years. That alone would change the ballance for me.
Cheers, Jan -- Trojitá, a fast Qt IMAP e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/
