piotrkaminski

30 ms·

1. 271.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   Heh, that's almost exactly like me: used internal tools at Google, brought up a Rietveld instance after I left. Except that I got frustrated with Rietveld and built https://reviewable.io -- you might want to check it out.
2. 272.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   I'm curious -- which code review tool are you using for your projects? Gerrit, or something else?
3. 273.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   You might also want to check out https://reviewable.io . It's got most of the useful features of Rietveld (and, to a lesser degree, Gerrit), but with a UI that isn't stuck in the '90s and one-click integration wit
4. 274.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   For a code review tool more powerful than GitHub's but with a much better UI than Gerrit, check out https://reviewable.io (disclosure: my project). It integrates smoothly with GitHub and doesn't require setting up you
5. 275.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   GitHub's a good start but PRs have some non-trivial limitations when it comes to reviewing code efficiently. Tools are springing up to help devs work around the problems without abandoning GitHub. You can take a look at GitColony, Sour
6. 276.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   A bit of hopefully useful self-promotion: for those interested in all* of these benefits without ditching GitHub, check out https://reviewable.io . It has batch comment support (as well as one-off instant send), incremental diff
7. 277.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   While GitHub isn't that great, it's sufficiently popular that there's a bunch of tools built on top of its API that supplement its failings. For example, for code reviews you can hook up https://reviewable.io (di
8. 278.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   In case you do want to try out another one at some point, I built https://reviewable.io to take some of my favorite features from Google's internal tool but integrate seamlessly with GitHub.
9. 279.▲
   by piotrkaminski 12y ago

   - GitHub doesn't show you what changed in a PR from the last time you looked at it. You can look through the individual commits, but this can be painful if there's a lot of them, and can easily become impossible if the code was m
10. 280.▲
    GitColony (communal code review)(gitcolony.com)

    1 points by piotrkaminski 12y ago|0 comments
11. 281.▲
    Resumes suck. Here’s the data(blog.alinelerner.com)

    16 points by piotrkaminski 12y ago|1 comments
12. 282.▲
    by piotrkaminski 12y ago

    Unfair perhaps, but I have a hunch that such people would make much better politicians than those who seek power. I'd even suggest that this could be the definition of citizenship: if you want to be a citizen (and vote), then you nee
13. 283.▲
    by piotrkaminski 12y ago

    They claim a battery life of 48 hours under "normal usage" (read: no GPS), with a charging time of 1.5 hours. Though if it's supposed to be used as a sleep tracker, I kinda wonder when we're supposed to charge it.
14. 284.▲
    Euclid: The Game(euclidthegame.com)

    2 points by piotrkaminski 12y ago|0 comments
15. 285.▲
    GitHub for reviewing code [is disappointing] (2013)(wrongsideofmemphis.com)

    3 points by piotrkaminski 12y ago|0 comments
16. 286.▲
    by piotrkaminski 12y ago

    Thanks, that makes sense. The point about service vs product is well taken, though I find myself wishing somebody supported both modalities: a service to get a prototype up and running quickly, with the option of moving to a self-hosted s
17. 287.▲
    by piotrkaminski 12y ago

    I must admit this makes me confused -- do RethinkDB and Firebase integrate in some non-obvious way? Both appear to be JSON databases with real-time change feeds so it would seem they'd be competitors if anything... Any chance you can