6 ms·

Does anyone know what code review system they are using with github?

by virtue3 12y ago

ImJasonH 12y ago
"We will use a Google-hosted instance of Gerrit for code reviews."
- virtue3 12y ago
  thank you. Missed that in the article (was skimming >_> )
  - melvinmt 12y ago
    Me too, my brain is wired to read Gerrit as a common Dutch first name, so I thought he was talking about a person named Gerrit.
    - enneff 12y ago
      It is! Gerrit (our new code review system) is named after Gerrit Rietveld (the designer), as it Rietveld (our old code review system).
- jacquesm 12y ago
  It lives here: https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/ https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/
justinsb 12y ago
They say it's Gerrit
tkrajcar 12y ago
I'm curious what Gerrit gets them that Github doesn't have natively, too.
- pwnna 12y ago
  Gerrit works well for a project that has many different repositories, as you can do code review all in one screen. I did some CyanogenMod development and I really liked gerrit, albeit its poor performance on Firefox (client side app that had weird JS freezes in fx only..)
- bradfitz 12y ago
  Go team member here. I've used five different code review tools, and Github is the worst of the five. I regularly bug them (Github) about this, and they know it. I hear rumors they've been working on it a lot. Github's review mechanisms barely scratch the surface of what's possible.
  - Locke1689 12y ago
    If any of the other ones are public, which did you like best? IIRC, Mondrian was good, but not great.
    - bradfitz 12y ago
      From best to worse, in my experience: 1) Google's current internal one 2) Gerrit (open source, to be used by Go) 3) Google's old one (Mondrian) 4) Rietveld (open source, but run for free at codereview.appspot.com) 5) Github I would totally suspect that Phabricator or Review Board would be well above Github (as are 1-4 in my list), but I don't know where. I have little desire to use or explore new code review systems at this point. Four per day is enough for me at the moment.
      - piotrkaminski 12y ago
        In case you do want to try out another one at some point, I built https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io to take some of my favorite features from Google's internal tool but integrate seamlessly with GitHub.
      - maherbeg 12y ago
        Review Board isn't as good as it could be. Sometimes it's diffing tool provides far too much noise to be useful.
_prometheus 12y ago
Hm, I agree that github CR is not good. Glaf they're using Issues though as Github discussions are a _really nice_ way to build software. I personally find Gerrit painful to use, but has critical features, as enneff described. Hope Github really steps up to the plate. Also, everyone who uses github whould really check out *Sourcegraph's code review stuff. They show you really useful things like: - exactly what definitions were added/removed/changed (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/defs. https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) - a diff with jump-to-definition links (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/files https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) - a list of people and projects impacted by the change (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/impact https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) Totally gets rid of the "understanding the PR diff" problem others mentioned
RoyalGecko 12y ago
Check out http://review.ninja http://review.ninja

Does anyone know what code review system they are using with github?

by virtue3 12y ago

Does anyone know what code review system they are using with github?

ImJasonH 12y ago

"We will use a Google-hosted instance of Gerrit for code reviews."

virtue3 12y ago
thank you. Missed that in the article (was skimming >_> )
- melvinmt 12y ago
  Me too, my brain is wired to read Gerrit as a common Dutch first name, so I thought he was talking about a person named Gerrit.
  - enneff 12y ago
    It is! Gerrit (our new code review system) is named after Gerrit Rietveld (the designer), as it Rietveld (our old code review system).
jacquesm 12y ago
It lives here: https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/ https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/

justinsb 12y ago

They say it's Gerrit

tkrajcar 12y ago

I'm curious what Gerrit gets them that Github doesn't have natively, too.

pwnna 12y ago
Gerrit works well for a project that has many different repositories, as you can do code review all in one screen. I did some CyanogenMod development and I really liked gerrit, albeit its poor performance on Firefox (client side app that had weird JS freezes in fx only..)
bradfitz 12y ago
Go team member here. I've used five different code review tools, and Github is the worst of the five. I regularly bug them (Github) about this, and they know it. I hear rumors they've been working on it a lot. Github's review mechanisms barely scratch the surface of what's possible.
- Locke1689 12y ago
  If any of the other ones are public, which did you like best? IIRC, Mondrian was good, but not great.
  - bradfitz 12y ago
    From best to worse, in my experience: 1) Google's current internal one 2) Gerrit (open source, to be used by Go) 3) Google's old one (Mondrian) 4) Rietveld (open source, but run for free at codereview.appspot.com) 5) Github I would totally suspect that Phabricator or Review Board would be well above Github (as are 1-4 in my list), but I don't know where. I have little desire to use or explore new code review systems at this point. Four per day is enough for me at the moment.
    - piotrkaminski 12y ago
      In case you do want to try out another one at some point, I built https://reviewable.io https://reviewable.io to take some of my favorite features from Google's internal tool but integrate seamlessly with GitHub.
    - maherbeg 12y ago
      Review Board isn't as good as it could be. Sometimes it's diffing tool provides far too much noise to be useful.

_prometheus 12y ago

Hm, I agree that github CR is not good. Glaf they're using Issues though as Github discussions are a _really nice_ way to build software. I personally find Gerrit painful to use, but has critical features, as enneff described. Hope Github really steps up to the plate. Also, everyone who uses github whould really check out *Sourcegraph's code review stuff. They show you really useful things like: - exactly what definitions were added/removed/changed (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/defs. https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) - a diff with jump-to-definition links (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/files https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) - a list of people and projects impacted by the change (https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.pulls/177/impact https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/fsouza/go-dockerclient/.p...) Totally gets rid of the "understanding the PR diff" problem others mentioned

RoyalGecko 12y ago

Check out http://review.ninja http://review.ninja