remember when github had an issue on their public roadmap for "pull request revisions" (aka gerrit-style patchsets) including a ui mockup showing diffs-of-diffs, and then they just quietly deleted it
reality is the battlefield
- she/they (pl)
- breadthcharge.net/
the first line goes in Cohost embeds
🐥 I am not embroiled in any legal battle
🐦 other than battles that are legal 🎮
I speak to the universe and it speaks back, in it's own way.
mastodon
email: contact at breadthcharge dot net
I live on the northeast coast of the US.
'non-functional programmer'. 'far left'.
conceptual midwife.
https://cohost.org/NireBryce/post/4929459-here-s-my-five-minut
If you can see the "show contact info" dropdown below, I follow you. If you want me to, ask and I'll think about it.
You must log in to comment.
in reply to @wiggles's post:
I do not like Gerrit very much, but how's Gerrit like...the only code platform that does code reviews for patchset series adequately
what don’t you like about gerrit? haven’t used it other than the code review
mandatory changeset IDs mean that either they'll be stuck in your git history forever (ugly) or the changes will have to be rebased & edited to strip this metadata (messy for merges). Updating changes after branch merge is a delicate process because Gerrit might just decide to put 2000 commits from the merged branch onto review again instead. Storing permissions and configuration in a special branch in git is weird and I wish they hadn't done it. Also I got a million little gripes because I was in charge of maintaining the company Gerrit in place of real DevOps ;P
but generally Gerrit is like... the Least Bad option for code review, and I miss it dearly while I'm working with ReviewBoard
