[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Making your project more openÅhowto enable Gerrit
- From: Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 15:44:14 -0400
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Mail-reply-to: <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.7.4
This seems backwatds.
To my way of thinking Gerrit should be making GIT and Bugzilla better.
If it tries to replace them it is sure to leave a lot of users
disappointed and irritated.
Therefore once the Gerrit ping-pong is complete, the Gerrit results
should be transferred in their entirety to Bugzilla/GIT as if the action
had happened there in the first place.
On 04.10.2013 15:38, Shawn Pearce wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I really like the flow that Gerrit provides. Pushing commits is
creating patchs and uploading them. However, I find with Gerrit (or
of Gerrit) is that the discussion is now spread across multiple
Bugs / feature requests come in on bugzilla where some discussion
change-set then appears are Gerrit where more discussion happens.
requirements / ideas appear back on the bug and suddenly the change
updated. I find it difficult to follow the discussion. With bugzilla
use of it), all discussions (from conception, to requirements, to
implementation, to delivery) happen in one continuos thread.
I'm not sure how the more experienced Gerrit users deal with this.
Gerrit developers try to do most discussion on the change itself, and
avoid using the mailing list or the bug tracker to discuss something.
But we have a similar opinion that the fractured discussion is not
It might be interesting to think about having some sort of plugin in
Gerrit that can grab comments from the related bug and include them
interleaved by timestamp with Gerrit events, so the entire discussion
is visible in one place on the Gerrit web UI.
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list