Hi,
Are you using the old or the new UI? There is a switch at the bottom of the
page.
(I'm not sure which one is better, so maybe try both and make your own decision)
In Gerrit, your code review is not published until you hit the "reply" button
in the change.
So, the review process is:
- From a change description, open the files to be reviewed
- Add your comments
- Navigate with prev/next (green arrows in the old ui) between the different
files
- When you have added all inline comments, go "up" (also a green arrow in the
old UI)
- Then, hit the Reply button to publish your review. At this point, you also
cast a vote on the change (from -2, which prevents everyone from pushing it, to
+2, which enables the commit to be merged)
A similar workflow applies if you want to make changes to the files directly
from the web ui
(you need to create an "edit", and then publish it when you are ready). This
workflow of edit then
publish is a bit unusual for comments, and takes some training indeed.
I've also started proting gertty to Haiku, which is a tool to perform code
reviews without using the web interface.
I did not get it to connect to Haiku Gerrit server yet, but I'll investigate
(it works with other Gerrit instances).
The benefits I see in comparison to the github tool (which seems to be the
reference here):
- Ability to do side-by-side diffs
- Possibility to rebase changes from the web ui and edit someone else changes
(in Github you would have to make a new pull request for this) - This is
important for us as we have a lot of patches where people will submit once, and
then
not follow-up on reviews, so someone else has to adopt the change and finish
the work
- Focus on reviewing commits one by one, where Github encourages reviewing the
whole changes for the pull request at once (the commit history suffers from
this)
- Ability to submit changes for review using just git (for example for github
you need the "hub" tool or use the web interface to create a pull request)
- Ability to cherry-pick pending changes directly from the git repo for testing
(some of our powerusers are doing this routinely now) - This is possible for
github too but a bit less handy, you need to add the fork the PR is from and
then cherry-pick from there. Easy cherry-picking is also important for testing
a commit when reviewing it.
- Ability to configure tabulation size, show the 80 column mark, and highlight
whitespace problems
- Usable on mobile phones and other small screen devices
--
Adrien.
13 août 2018 11:26 "Stephan Aßmus" <superstippi@xxxxxx> a écrit:
Hi,
I just wanted to ask: Is everyone who is using Gerrit happy with this tool?
What other options for code review would we even have and are there important
benefits to Gerrit
over these other options?
I'm asking because everytime I use the tool, I find the interface really
cumbersome and not
intuitive. Most of the time I don't feel I know where I am and how to get
back. Once I finally
managed to collect some comments I always spend more than a minute to figure
out how to actually
post them. And just now, I have lost a great deal of text I typed into a
comment, since I must have
accidentally pressed a wrong key on the keyboard. I just hate the whole
experience.
Best regards,
-Stephan
