8 ms·

LGTM is a simple pull request approval system for GitHub

136 points by samber 10y ago

xgbi 10y ago
Do you know if there is the same thing in Gitlab?
- themihai 10y ago
  Also on bitbucket...
- samber 10y ago
  yes, I know, but my company is using Github for a long time and migrate is not planed.
  - akerro 10y ago
    You should compare annual costs of GitHub and GitLab CE or EE and start planning it.
- exception_e 10y ago
  Definitely not as feature-filled as the post, but +1 and thumb ups will change the view to show people have approved a merge request. Works well for the team I'm on.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
bjacobel 10y ago
I first encountered LGTM on some of Airbnb's open source repos, here's an example of it at work on a closed [1] and open [2] Enzyme PR: 1: https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/449 https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/449 2: https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/459 https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/459 I love that this enforces a social practice a lot of teams use already, and I'm pushing to add it to my own team's workflow (both internal and for open source contributions). Edit: another tool in the same vein people might be interested in is Facebook's mention-bot [3], which analyzes PR diffs and @-mentions people it thinks would be good reviewers based on git blame of lines touched. 3: https://github.com/facebook/mention-bot https://github.com/facebook/mention-bot
kerneis 10y ago
I cannot find a way to "undo LGTM" if I was to quick to give approval. Working at a company where I have to LGTM commits literally every day, believe me that it is necessary every now and then.
- x0rg 10y ago
  In zappr (https://github.com/zalando/zappr https://github.com/zalando/zappr) you can, check it out. An example: https://github.com/zalando/zappr/blob/master/.zappr-example.yaml https://github.com/zalando/zappr/blob/master/.zappr-example.... .
- bradrydzewski 10y ago
  it would definitely be trivial to add the ability to rescind an approval with a -1, for example. Unfortunately I'm a bit bogged down with my other OSS projects at this time, but I would be happy to accept a PR. In fact, this is the function you would want to update https://github.com/lgtmco/lgtm/blob/master/web/hook.go#L100 https://github.com/lgtmco/lgtm/blob/master/web/hook.go#L100
killercup 10y ago
http://homu.io http://homu.io goes a bit further (it actually triggers CI builds of the merge results to check they are okay), but it seems it is currently unmaintained. BTW, I would gladly pay money for this! Even more in combination with features from Facebook's mention-bot/Rust's highfive.
- masklinn 10y ago
  > http://homu.io http://homu.io goes a bit further (it actually triggers CI builds of the merge results to check they are okay), but it seems it is currently unmaintained. barosl apparently hasn't had the time to work on it, and homu-as-a-service has apparently stopped working some time ago. After discussing it with barosl Rust has apparently moved to the Servo fork of it: https://github.com/servo/homu https://github.com/servo/homu No bors/homu as a service at this point though, sadly. https://github.com/rust-community/team/issues/41 https://github.com/rust-community/team/issues/41 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/122 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/122 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/151 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/151
- akerro 10y ago
  https://b.agilob.net/choose-gitlab-for-your-next-project https://b.agilob.net/choose-gitlab-for-your-next-project Point 5.
  - Manishearth 10y ago
    IIRC gitlab doesn't queue PRs (so you could potentially get a failing master branch), but yeah, that covers most use cases.
    - sytse 10y ago
      agilob.net is down, probably this feature is referenced https://about.gitlab.com/2015/07/29/feature-highlight-merge-request-approvals/ https://about.gitlab.com/2015/07/29/feature-highlight-merge-... Regarding PR queuing do you mean https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/4176 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/4176 ?
caniszczyk 10y ago
I also recommend checking out PullApprove, we've had some success using it in some of our open source projects: https://pullapprove.com/ https://pullapprove.com/
cvburgess 10y ago
Is this type of functionality planned for an official GitHub feature? Gitlab and Bitbucket both incorporate some type of similar functionality already...
x0rg 10y ago
Another tool is https://github.com/zalando/zappr https://github.com/zalando/zappr . We built this and we are currently quite happy with it and open to suggestions, issues, PRs.
- agotterer 10y ago
  Why is this being down voted?
  - ZalandoTech 10y ago
    Here's a blog post on Zappr explaining its origins and more about how it works: https://tech.zalando.de/blog/zappr--enhancing-your-github-workflow/ https://tech.zalando.de/blog/zappr--enhancing-your-github-wo...
  - markcerqueira 10y ago
    Maybe, like StackOverflow, HackerNews suffers from the "don't self-promote things even if they are relevant and useful" syndrome?
ninjakeyboard 10y ago
Not talking about the project, but is the term 'LGTM' (looks good to me) used often in tech? I've heard it from Googlers but otherwise haven't really seen the term in tech.
- reubenbond 10y ago
  It's common at Microsoft to sign off on a code review with "LGTM".
- agnivade 10y ago
  Yup, its used often. Atleast in my company(not Google), LGTM and SGTM are used pretty commonly.
- llamataboot 10y ago
  I've always had it as "Looks Good To Merge" -- we use it every day...
  - ninjakeyboard 10y ago
    it's used more generally than in code. eg design doc review you'd say "LGTM" to say that there are no suggestions.
  - percept 10y ago
    Let's Get The Manual
  - mdk754 10y ago
    Let's get this merged!
- loeg 10y ago
  Looks Good to Me is commonly used in code review at my employer (not Google).
  - Kunlun 10y ago
    Same here we are using it for most of our commits. When someone is done with their changes, they issue a PR which is reviewed by one or two team members before being rejected or merged by saying LGTM.
glibgil 10y ago
Why not make it distributed? Git is distributed
- hk__2 10y ago
  How would you make that distributed? You still need a unique repository that serves as a reference and on which pull-requests are made.
  - glibgil 10y ago
    yes, or a unique branch
fishnchips 10y ago
I really appreciate when project authors make it so simple for users to deploy. Thank you, folks!
johnwheeler 10y ago
Is it: "Looks Good to Me" or "Let's Get this Moving"? :-)
- etjossem 10y ago
  Let's Git This Merged? :D
indrekju 10y ago
We use github-review-helper instead https://github.com/salemove/github-review-helper https://github.com/salemove/github-review-helper . It also has fixup commits support which is quite useful in our workflow.
ryancox 10y ago
The Kubernetes submit-queue munger is also worth a look: https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/tree/master/mungegithub https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/tree/master/mungegithu...
silasb 10y ago
Hmm, I mostly work with Stash nowadays and they have the approve/disapprove buttons which I like better than LGTM comment.
dominsbeard 10y ago
Does anyone have experience with https://github.com/reviewninja/review.ninja https://github.com/reviewninja/review.ninja
eridius 10y ago
Since we're talking about GitHub pull requests, my favorite tool for this is https://reviewable.io/ https://reviewable.io/. It fixes basically everything about GitHub pull requests.
- piotrkaminski 10y ago
  And of relevance to the original article, in Reviewable you can customize your review completion condition with a snippet of code it will run on your behalf and post the result as a GitHub commit status, so you can have basically any approval system you want. One of the examples is a simple LGTM-based system like in OP. (Disclaimer: I run reviewable.io.)
PuercoPop 10y ago
It would be nice if instead of having to comment LGTM a thumbs up reaction on the FP of the PR would suffice
- bjacobel 10y ago
  I believe the actual "LGTM" phrase is configurable via a .lgtm file in the root of the repo. Airbnb's Enzyme has it configured to work with a :+1:.
  - PuercoPop 10y ago
    From reading the manual I saw it was configurable to change the regexp it matches, not property's of the OP
- bradrydzewski 10y ago
  LGTM doesn't currently work with GitHub reactions mostly because the API [1] wasn't available back in November when the project was created. I do personally like comments because they are a bit more visible than reactions, which require you to hover over to see more details. Now that the reactions API is available it is certainly possible to enable this sort of functionality. I openly encourage people to fork the project and hack into something that works for their team. [1] https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-05-12-reactions-api-preview/ https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-05-12-reactions-ap...
bradrydzewski 10y ago
I'm a bit late to the party here. I'm the author of the project and happy to answer any questions.
henrikn 10y ago
Another option is to do away with blocking on pull requests altogether and review after the fact. It has some benefits (and some downsides). I blogged about that here: http://thepugautomatic.com/2014/02/code-review/ http://thepugautomatic.com/2014/02/code-review/ We use a home-grown tool on top of GitHub to review commit-by-commit after the fact: https://github.com/henrik/remit https://github.com/henrik/remit

136 points by samber 10y ago

xgbi 10y ago

Do you know if there is the same thing in Gitlab?

themihai 10y ago
Also on bitbucket...
samber 10y ago
yes, I know, but my company is using Github for a long time and migrate is not planed.
- akerro 10y ago
  You should compare annual costs of GitHub and GitLab CE or EE and start planning it.
exception_e 10y ago
Definitely not as feature-filled as the post, but +1 and thumb ups will change the view to show people have approved a merge request. Works well for the team I'm on.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

bjacobel 10y ago

I first encountered LGTM on some of Airbnb's open source repos, here's an example of it at work on a closed [1] and open [2] Enzyme PR: 1: https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/449 https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/449 2: https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/459 https://github.com/airbnb/enzyme/pull/459 I love that this enforces a social practice a lot of teams use already, and I'm pushing to add it to my own team's workflow (both internal and for open source contributions). Edit: another tool in the same vein people might be interested in is Facebook's mention-bot [3], which analyzes PR diffs and @-mentions people it thinks would be good reviewers based on git blame of lines touched. 3: https://github.com/facebook/mention-bot https://github.com/facebook/mention-bot

kerneis 10y ago

I cannot find a way to "undo LGTM" if I was to quick to give approval. Working at a company where I have to LGTM commits literally every day, believe me that it is necessary every now and then.

x0rg 10y ago
In zappr (https://github.com/zalando/zappr https://github.com/zalando/zappr) you can, check it out. An example: https://github.com/zalando/zappr/blob/master/.zappr-example.yaml https://github.com/zalando/zappr/blob/master/.zappr-example.... .
bradrydzewski 10y ago
it would definitely be trivial to add the ability to rescind an approval with a -1, for example. Unfortunately I'm a bit bogged down with my other OSS projects at this time, but I would be happy to accept a PR. In fact, this is the function you would want to update https://github.com/lgtmco/lgtm/blob/master/web/hook.go#L100 https://github.com/lgtmco/lgtm/blob/master/web/hook.go#L100

killercup 10y ago

http://homu.io http://homu.io goes a bit further (it actually triggers CI builds of the merge results to check they are okay), but it seems it is currently unmaintained. BTW, I would gladly pay money for this! Even more in combination with features from Facebook's mention-bot/Rust's highfive.

masklinn 10y ago
> http://homu.io http://homu.io goes a bit further (it actually triggers CI builds of the merge results to check they are okay), but it seems it is currently unmaintained. barosl apparently hasn't had the time to work on it, and homu-as-a-service has apparently stopped working some time ago. After discussing it with barosl Rust has apparently moved to the Servo fork of it: https://github.com/servo/homu https://github.com/servo/homu No bors/homu as a service at this point though, sadly. https://github.com/rust-community/team/issues/41 https://github.com/rust-community/team/issues/41 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/122 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/122 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/151 https://github.com/barosl/homu/issues/151
akerro 10y ago
https://b.agilob.net/choose-gitlab-for-your-next-project https://b.agilob.net/choose-gitlab-for-your-next-project Point 5.
- Manishearth 10y ago
  IIRC gitlab doesn't queue PRs (so you could potentially get a failing master branch), but yeah, that covers most use cases.
  - sytse 10y ago
    agilob.net is down, probably this feature is referenced https://about.gitlab.com/2015/07/29/feature-highlight-merge-request-approvals/ https://about.gitlab.com/2015/07/29/feature-highlight-merge-... Regarding PR queuing do you mean https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/4176 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/4176 ?

caniszczyk 10y ago

I also recommend checking out PullApprove, we've had some success using it in some of our open source projects: https://pullapprove.com/ https://pullapprove.com/

cvburgess 10y ago

Is this type of functionality planned for an official GitHub feature? Gitlab and Bitbucket both incorporate some type of similar functionality already...

x0rg 10y ago

Another tool is https://github.com/zalando/zappr https://github.com/zalando/zappr . We built this and we are currently quite happy with it and open to suggestions, issues, PRs.

agotterer 10y ago
Why is this being down voted?
- ZalandoTech 10y ago
  Here's a blog post on Zappr explaining its origins and more about how it works: https://tech.zalando.de/blog/zappr--enhancing-your-github-workflow/ https://tech.zalando.de/blog/zappr--enhancing-your-github-wo...
- markcerqueira 10y ago
  Maybe, like StackOverflow, HackerNews suffers from the "don't self-promote things even if they are relevant and useful" syndrome?

ninjakeyboard 10y ago

Not talking about the project, but is the term 'LGTM' (looks good to me) used often in tech? I've heard it from Googlers but otherwise haven't really seen the term in tech.

reubenbond 10y ago
It's common at Microsoft to sign off on a code review with "LGTM".
agnivade 10y ago
Yup, its used often. Atleast in my company(not Google), LGTM and SGTM are used pretty commonly.
llamataboot 10y ago
I've always had it as "Looks Good To Merge" -- we use it every day...
- ninjakeyboard 10y ago
  it's used more generally than in code. eg design doc review you'd say "LGTM" to say that there are no suggestions.
- percept 10y ago
  Let's Get The Manual
- mdk754 10y ago
  Let's get this merged!
loeg 10y ago
Looks Good to Me is commonly used in code review at my employer (not Google).
- Kunlun 10y ago
  Same here we are using it for most of our commits. When someone is done with their changes, they issue a PR which is reviewed by one or two team members before being rejected or merged by saying LGTM.

glibgil 10y ago

Why not make it distributed? Git is distributed

hk__2 10y ago
How would you make that distributed? You still need a unique repository that serves as a reference and on which pull-requests are made.
- glibgil 10y ago
  yes, or a unique branch

fishnchips 10y ago

I really appreciate when project authors make it so simple for users to deploy. Thank you, folks!

johnwheeler 10y ago

Is it: "Looks Good to Me" or "Let's Get this Moving"? :-)

etjossem 10y ago
Let's Git This Merged? :D

indrekju 10y ago

We use github-review-helper instead https://github.com/salemove/github-review-helper https://github.com/salemove/github-review-helper . It also has fixup commits support which is quite useful in our workflow.

ryancox 10y ago

The Kubernetes submit-queue munger is also worth a look: https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/tree/master/mungegithub https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/tree/master/mungegithu...

silasb 10y ago

Hmm, I mostly work with Stash nowadays and they have the approve/disapprove buttons which I like better than LGTM comment.

dominsbeard 10y ago

Does anyone have experience with https://github.com/reviewninja/review.ninja https://github.com/reviewninja/review.ninja

eridius 10y ago

Since we're talking about GitHub pull requests, my favorite tool for this is https://reviewable.io/ https://reviewable.io/. It fixes basically everything about GitHub pull requests.

piotrkaminski 10y ago
And of relevance to the original article, in Reviewable you can customize your review completion condition with a snippet of code it will run on your behalf and post the result as a GitHub commit status, so you can have basically any approval system you want. One of the examples is a simple LGTM-based system like in OP. (Disclaimer: I run reviewable.io.)

PuercoPop 10y ago

It would be nice if instead of having to comment LGTM a thumbs up reaction on the FP of the PR would suffice

bjacobel 10y ago
I believe the actual "LGTM" phrase is configurable via a .lgtm file in the root of the repo. Airbnb's Enzyme has it configured to work with a :+1:.
- PuercoPop 10y ago
  From reading the manual I saw it was configurable to change the regexp it matches, not property's of the OP
bradrydzewski 10y ago
LGTM doesn't currently work with GitHub reactions mostly because the API [1] wasn't available back in November when the project was created. I do personally like comments because they are a bit more visible than reactions, which require you to hover over to see more details. Now that the reactions API is available it is certainly possible to enable this sort of functionality. I openly encourage people to fork the project and hack into something that works for their team. [1] https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-05-12-reactions-api-preview/ https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-05-12-reactions-ap...

bradrydzewski 10y ago

I'm a bit late to the party here. I'm the author of the project and happy to answer any questions.

henrikn 10y ago

Another option is to do away with blocking on pull requests altogether and review after the fact. It has some benefits (and some downsides). I blogged about that here: http://thepugautomatic.com/2014/02/code-review/ http://thepugautomatic.com/2014/02/code-review/ We use a home-grown tool on top of GitHub to review commit-by-commit after the fact: https://github.com/henrik/remit https://github.com/henrik/remit