4 ms·

I can't help thinking that requiring a specific code review tool is a bit ridiculous, especially considering the hoops they want to jump through to enforce it.

• dom0 10y ago
  Because maintainer timer is, in your world, a worthless thing?
  • strictfp 10y ago
    No, because the tools are very similar and they can just ask contributors to adapt to the maintaners wishes. Code diffs are such a small part of reviewing a new feature. "Just deal with it" is what I think. I don't require notepad on my Mac, so why should they require gerrit on github? And besides, if they want to they can just diff it on their own machines with whatever tools they like!
    • dom0 10y ago
      Gerrit and Github are not "very similar". They are quite different. (Something that would be rather immediately clear to anyone who used either for some duration) > And besides, if they want to they can just diff it on their own machines with whatever tools they like! Oh yes, a very compelling argument when discussing workflow tools is to suggest local diffs. Bravo!
      • strictfp 10y ago
        Well, I happen to have used both. And it all depends on your perspective. I would change my tools in a heartbeat to streamline the process for users or contributors. To me it depends on if you're user focused or technology driven. I think it's kind of akin to switching to git but insist that all merges have been done with perforce merge, because I think it's better in some way. Sure, it might be true, but do you really want to go against the stream to prove your point?
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]