I've used it. It's fine, but GH is probably the lowest-friction option
for most developers.
- Original Message -
From: "Benoit Chesneau"
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2014 2:11:37 AM
Subject: Re: Review Board
On Mar 30, 2014 12:37 AM, "And
On Mar 30, 2014 12:37 AM, "Andy Wenk" wrote:
>
> On 30 March 2014 00:07, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > > Let's try to wrap this thread up. Too many emails on it already.
> > >
> > >
On 30 March 2014 00:07, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Let's try to wrap this thread up. Too many emails on it already.
> >
> > Benoit, let's keep Review Board around for a little while so that
> > people
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Let's try to wrap this thread up. Too many emails on it already.
>
> Benoit, let's keep Review Board around for a little while so that
> people who want to use it can use it. We get notifications sent to the
> list.
Let's try to wrap this thread up. Too many emails on it already.
Benoit, let's keep Review Board around for a little while so that
people who want to use it can use it. We get notifications sent to the
list. And as long as we're not linking to it from our website, I can't
ima
esneau
> >>>> >
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Andy Wenk >
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 19 February 2014 15:25, Robert Samuel Newson
> >>>>>>
>
Yes. It's misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
19, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Andy Wenk wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 February 2014 15:25, Robert Samuel Newson
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. It's misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>>>>>>
>>>&g
t;>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
>>>>
>>>> well nobody really tried it
that stumble on it.
+1
On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
well nobody really tried it ...
There is apparently some possibilities to bind automatically the
review to review board, but not sure if it's feasible on apache. Als
> Yes. It's misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>> >>
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> >
>> >> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
>>
>
+1
> >
> >
> >> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
> >>
> >> > Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
>
>
> well nobody really tried it ...
>
> There is apparently some possibilities to bind automatically the
> review
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Andy Wenk wrote:
> On 19 February 2014 15:25, Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
>
>> Yes. It's misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
>>
>> >
On 19 February 2014 15:25, Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
> Yes. It’s misleading for folks that stumble on it.
>
+1
> On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
> >
> > On 19 February 2014 14:49, Andy We
Yes. It’s misleading for folks that stumble on it.
On 19 Feb 2014, at 14:22, Noah Slater wrote:
> Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
>
> On 19 February 2014 14:49, Andy Wenk wrote:
>> On 19 February 2014 14:15, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
Should we decommission our Review Board instance?
On 19 February 2014 14:49, Andy Wenk wrote:
> On 19 February 2014 14:15, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>
>>
>> On 19 Feb 2014, at 13:51 , Garren Smith wrote:
>>
>> > I agree with Robert here. Github integration is gett
>
> +1
>
also +1 for github ... Humbedooh does magic things :)
> >
> > On 19 Feb 2014, at 2:49 PM, Robert Samuel Newson
> wrote:
> >
> >> We intend to review work before merging to master, which is why we have
> an account on Review Board in the f
wrote:
>
>> We intend to review work before merging to master, which is why we have an
>> account on Review Board in the first place, to see if it can help.
>>
>> Given the level of integration with github now, I think we can and should
>> use pull requests
ave an
> account on Review Board in the first place, to see if it can help.
>
> Given the level of integration with github now, I think we can and should use
> pull requests for intra-team work just like we already do for requests from
> outside of the group with commit bits.
>
We intend to review work before merging to master, which is why we have an
account on Review Board in the first place, to see if it can help.
Given the level of integration with github now, I think we can and should use
pull requests for intra-team work just like we already do for requests from
;
>On 19 Feb 2014, at 03:13 , Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn.
> wrote:
>
>> The patch creation is simple but the real problem is the culture.
>Review board assumes pre commit Reviews where on fact the code is
>usually already pushed, which makes the review post commit.
>
On 19 Feb 2014, at 03:13 , Florian Westreicher Bakk.techn.
wrote:
> The patch creation is simple but the real problem is the culture. Review
> board assumes pre commit Reviews where on fact the code is usually already
> pushed, which makes the review post commit.
That’s why we us
The patch creation is simple but the real problem is the culture. Review board
assumes pre commit Reviews where on fact the code is usually already pushed,
which makes the review post commit.
Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
>
>I think we should use github instead (especially as the integ
I think we should use github instead (especially as the integration continues
to improve).
The 'upload patch file' approach for Review Board makes it a non-starter in my
opinion. (Yes, we could insist every participant installs command lines tools
to finesse that, but come on)
B.
I have used review board in the past. It's easy to use but you can do most of
it on
github nowadays. Just open pull requests, others can review and comment them.
Noah Slater wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>It's been two weeks since we got our Review Board set up. But it looks
>l
Hi folks,
It's been two weeks since we got our Review Board set up. But it looks
like nobody is using it. Is this something we want to continue using?
Does someone want to draft some documentation for it? (Or just go
first and get the ball rolling?)
https://reviews.apache.org/groups/co
I dunno Benoit. Perhaps ask someone from the Infra team, or another
project using it.
On 3 February 2014 08:53, Benoit Chesneau wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>
>> P.S. Your Review Board account is not linked to LDAP. You'll have to
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> P.S. Your Review Board account is not linked to LDAP. You'll have to
> sign up for an account.
>
>
>
Thanks, Just created an account. It looks like that review board isn't
actually linked to git [1] . Is this poss
P.S. Your Review Board account is not linked to LDAP. You'll have to
sign up for an account.
On 2 February 2014 16:16, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We have a Review Board instance set up:
>
> https://reviews.apache.org/groups/couchdb/
>
> Use of this is vo
Hi folks,
We have a Review Board instance set up:
https://reviews.apache.org/groups/couchdb/
Use of this is voluntary at the moment. But please get stuck in. This
tool is for code reviews. Post your code, request a review, and then
ship it!
If it works out, we'll might make it an off
f nobody objects, you can proceed
4. Post another note to infrastruct...@apache.org, requesting them to set
up Review Board
Let me know if you get stuck!
Thanks,
On 3 June 2013 21:25, Alexander Shorin wrote:
> Hi Noah!
>
> We'd like to try off Reviews Board, but it seems
Hi Noah!
We'd like to try off Reviews Board, but it seems it requires some
additional configuration to start use it with CouchDB Git repository.
Could you help us to make some very basic setup for the first steps?
Also it would be great if you have any experience to share about.
--
,,,^..^,,,
O
Personally, I think the github PR as code review facilitator is stupendous.
Review board ... hurts my eyes... I can't even figure out what's going on
there.
--
*matt j. sorenson*
mobile: 320-424-0309
phone calls always welcome :)
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
I guess what I am saying is that we have plenty of ways to get stuff
to us (and for us plenty of places to keep track of) and I don’t know
if adding a different, but similar, place helps much.
I wouldn’t mind having enough automation in a way that all contributions
go through the review board
once place. Line by line, or on the pull request as a whole.
Review board is the same thing, except it's hosted on Apache infrastructure.
Have a look:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/
Please note that I am not advocating it. I am bringing it to the
community's attention to see if we are
I seem to remember someone saying it was a bit tied to SVN but I could
be misremembering. Other than that I only know that it exists. I
haven't tried using it.
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Anybody?
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> M
Anybody?
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Might this be useful for us?
>
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> NS
>
--
NS
Hi,
Might this be useful for us?
https://reviews.apache.org/r/
Thanks,
--
NS
38 matches
Mail list logo
