4 ms·
https://www.gerritcodereview.com/about.html https://www.gerritcodereview.com/about.html It's a code review platform used heavily by Google.
by natebc 3y ago
https://www.gerritcodereview.com/about.html https://www.gerritcodereview.com/about.html
It's a code review platform used heavily by Google.
- laurels-marts 3y agoIf it's closed-source project store it in whatever proprietary platform you want. But if it's open-source and you want contributors the just do everyone a favour and use the de-facto platform.
- bqmjjx0kac 3y agoGerrit is significantly nicer to use. It keeps track of each patch set you upload and lets you diff between them. GitHub seems to just... forget about everything but the two most recent uploads.
- danpalmer 3y agoI see your point, but some of the biggest open source projects don’t use the GitHub workflow: Chromium, Linux, Go, Android, and so on. The GitHub workflow is great for many projects but doesn’t really scale to thousands of contributors, every large project on GitHub (e.g. Kubernetes, VSCode) end up with loads of tooling, loads of pain, and a bad experience for contributors and maintainers. Also Gerrit isn’t proprietary. It’s git for the VCS and gerrit is just a web app on top of that. It just works in a different model to GitHub.
- TheDong 3y agoThe linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open source project, it should be using an open source review platform that allows improvements and specialization of the code hosting too. Using github, where the review tools are bad and can't be improved by an outsider, is a slap in the face to open source. Frankly, I'm tired of people using github. The fact that it still doesn't have any idea of patchsets and diffs between them is cripplingly bad (i.e. you force push a new version of your change, there's no easy way to review the diff between the old and new version of your change). Having to use yet more third party tools, like https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io, isn't an answer to this, it's just a sign that github should be open source so these could be forks or first-party tools. It's also just insulting for an open source project to force people to use a proprietary platform owned by microsoft.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoBut gerrit is open source, not proprietary. In fact, github is a proprietary platform that we shouldn't make essential to FOSS projects.