You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> on 2019/11/13 16:21:23 UTC
[DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Heya,
Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code review
were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a Phabricator
instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have
this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting
those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling around
just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Nick
[0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
[1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
Thanks all for the comments. I've filed
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-23557 for hanging subtasks
related to this resolution.
Thanks,
Nick
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:21 AM Mingliang Liu <li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bq. I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
> accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
>
> +1 (non-binding) on this idea. Other than the doc and dev-support scripts,
> there is also a link to ReviewBoard in src/site/site.xml. We can put github
> over there I guess.
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:32 PM Zach York <zy...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1, much easier and available.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:56 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding), GitHub is a much better user experience, for both
> > > reviewers and contributors
> > >
> > > Geoffrey.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:48 AM Guangxu Cheng <gu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > > It will be more convenient to use Github PR.
> > > >
> > > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
> > > >
> > > > > +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to
> > > > > committers...
> > > > >
> > > > > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四
> > > 下午6:11写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> > > > > > To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github
> > > > reviews
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so
> > only
> > > > > > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <
> ndimiduk@apache.org
> > > > > <mailto:
> > > > > > ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Heya,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where
> > code
> > > > > review
> > > > > > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a
> > > > > Phabricator
> > > > > > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that
> > we
> > > > have
> > > > > > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're
> > making
> > > a
> > > > > > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line
> > > patch
> > > > > > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while
> > > > supporting
> > > > > > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support
> > tooling
> > > > > around
> > > > > > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> > > > > > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1],
> probably
> > > > > others)
> > > > > > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Nick
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> > > > > > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> L
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Mingliang Liu <li...@gmail.com>.
bq. I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
+1 (non-binding) on this idea. Other than the doc and dev-support scripts,
there is also a link to ReviewBoard in src/site/site.xml. We can put github
over there I guess.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:32 PM Zach York <zy...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1, much easier and available.
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:56 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding), GitHub is a much better user experience, for both
> > reviewers and contributors
> >
> > Geoffrey.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:48 AM Guangxu Cheng <gu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > > It will be more convenient to use Github PR.
> > >
> > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
> > >
> > > > +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to
> > > > committers...
> > > >
> > > > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四
> > 下午6:11写道：
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> > > > > To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github
> > > reviews
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so
> only
> > > > > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org
> > > > <mailto:
> > > > > ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Heya,
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where
> code
> > > > review
> > > > > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a
> > > > Phabricator
> > > > > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that
> we
> > > have
> > > > > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're
> making
> > a
> > > > > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line
> > patch
> > > > > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while
> > > supporting
> > > > > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support
> tooling
> > > > around
> > > > > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> > > > > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably
> > > > others)
> > > > > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Nick
> > > > >
> > > > > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> > > > > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
L
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Zach York <zy...@gmail.com>.
+1, much easier and available.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:56 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding), GitHub is a much better user experience, for both
> reviewers and contributors
>
> Geoffrey.
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:48 AM Guangxu Cheng <gu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > It will be more convenient to use Github PR.
> >
> > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
> >
> > > +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to
> > > committers...
> > >
> > > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四
> 下午6:11写道：
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
> > > >
> > > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> > > > To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github
> > reviews
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
> > > > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org
> > > <mailto:
> > > > ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Heya,
> > > >
> > > > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code
> > > review
> > > > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a
> > > Phabricator
> > > > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we
> > have
> > > > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making
> a
> > > > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line
> patch
> > > > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while
> > supporting
> > > > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling
> > > around
> > > > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
> > > >
> > > > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> > > > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably
> > > others)
> > > > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> > > > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non-binding), GitHub is a much better user experience, for both
reviewers and contributors
Geoffrey.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:48 AM Guangxu Cheng <gu...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
> It will be more convenient to use Github PR.
>
> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
>
> > +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to
> > committers...
> >
> > Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:11写道：
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
> > >
> > > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> > > To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github
> reviews
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
> > > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org
> > <mailto:
> > > ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Heya,
> > >
> > > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code
> > review
> > > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a
> > Phabricator
> > > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we
> have
> > > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
> > > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
> > > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while
> supporting
> > > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling
> > around
> > > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
> > >
> > > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> > > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably
> > others)
> > > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> > > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> > > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Guangxu Cheng <gu...@gmail.com>.
+1
It will be more convenient to use Github PR.
张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:17写道：
> +1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to
> committers...
>
> Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:11写道：
>
> > +1
> >
> > I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
> >
> > From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> > To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
> > committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org
> <mailto:
> > ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Heya,
> >
> > Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code
> review
> > were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a
> Phabricator
> > instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have
> > this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
> > strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
> > reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting
> > those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling
> around
> > just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
> >
> > I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> > basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably
> others)
> > accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> > [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
+1, ReviewBoard is almost dead now as it is only available to committers...
Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> 于2019年11月14日周四 下午6:11写道：
> +1
>
> I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
>
> From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
> To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
>
> +1
>
> Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
> committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org<mailto:
> ndimiduk@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Heya,
>
> Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code review
> were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a Phabricator
> instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have
> this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
> strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
> reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting
> those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling around
> just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
>
> I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
> accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com>.
+1
I also like the GitHub way much more compared to ReviewBoard.
From: Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>
Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 at 6:23 PM
To: HBase Dev List <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
+1
Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>> wrote:
Heya,
Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code review
were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a Phabricator
instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have
this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting
those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling around
just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Nick
[0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
[1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate Review Board in favor of Github reviews
Posted by Peter Somogyi <ps...@apache.org>.
+1
Another issue with ReviewBoard is that it requires Apache ID so only
committers are able to create new reviews or even comment.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Heya,
>
> Seems in the old days we were explicitly non-strict about where code review
> were happening. I remember bouncing between Review Board and a Phabricator
> instance (in addition to in-line patch reviews on JIRA). Now that we have
> this fancy Gitbox and integration with GitHub, it seems we're making a
> strong statement toward using Github PRs (in addition to in-line patch
> reviews on JIRA) for our code review system. Is it worth while supporting
> those older tools? I think maintaining the developer support tooling around
> just these two mechanisms is plenty to keep up with.
>
> I propose we make the move to Github PR's "official". This
> basically involves updating the tome (here [0], here [1], probably others)
> accordingly and sweeping the `dev-support` dir for old scripts.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> [0]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#developing
> [1]: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#reviewboard
>