Contributors mailing list archives
contributors@odoo-community.org
Browse archives
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?
external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
by
Camptocamp France SAS, Alexandre Fayolle
I've noticed there are a number of external review systems for the Github environment which we may want to use. Popular choices include * https://www.review.ninja/ * https://reviewable.io/ Quick comparison from reading the sites of both tools (I have not used any as of now) Review Ninja ------------ * beta version, sponsored by SAP , legalese contract to sign, which does not look quite nice, may not be free for OSS projects * allows to put flags such as [fix] in github review comments which are displayed in the PR status * uses "ninja stars" for approvals. It is possible to configure a minimum number of stars for a PR to become successful, and it seems easy to check who gave a star to a PR * github team integration * notifications can be sent when ninja stars are given * the doc is available and seems clear reviewable.io ------------- * pay for private project, free for OSS model * review done in another app * LGTM button, presumably with reports / notifications * possible to resolve opinion on individual review comments * review messages have a workflow: draft / publish * link to Travis in review tool * can write rules for review completion * nice dashboard * "review me on reviewable.io" button on PR I'm tempted to set up reviewable.io for a couple of repositories, in order to evaluate it. The FAQ warns that mixing github review and reviewable.io review is not optimal: "While comments posted in one will also appear in the other, line comments will turn into top-level comments due to the systems' irreconcilable approaches to line numbering. Also, Reviewable expects that all participants are using its system for tracking unreviewed files and unresolved comments, so if some people are using GitHub those counters probably won't be right." (https://github.com/Reviewable/Reviewable/wiki/FAQ) What do you think? -- Alexandre Fayolle Chef de Projet Tel : +33 4 58 48 20 30 Camptocamp France SAS Savoie Technolac, BP 352 73377 Le Bourget du Lac Cedex http://www.camptocamp.com
Reference
-
Should we use the new GitHub reactions?
by Yajo <yajo.sk8@gmail.com> - 11/03/2016 10:13:21 - 0-
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
by Yajo <yajo.sk8@gmail.com> - 22/03/2016 09:28:11 - 0 -
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byCamptocamp SA, Joël Grand Guillaume -
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byMoaHub, Graeme Gellatly -
Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?
byVauxoo, Moisés López Calderón -
Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?
byNumérigraphe, Lionel Sausin -
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byCamptocamp SA, Joël Grand Guillaume -
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byAcsone SA/NV, Laurent Mignon -
Re: external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byElico Corp, Eric Caudal -
external review tools (was Re: Should we use the new GitHub reactions?)
byCamptocamp France SAS, Alexandre Fayolle