Re: GOP-PROP 13: patch management tools

[Graham Percival]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 09:04:39PM +0200, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> My impression is that the main problem is the "duplicancy" of data and
> e-mail threads.  Over and over again i'm getting lost, for example:

I can't see that going away.
- email is the most convenient option for quick discussion
- rietveld is the best option (other than other potential review
  tools) for discussing specific bits of code
- issue tracker keeps comments in a more organized "archived"
  state

It would be nice if specific patches/issues were discussed on
either rietveld or the issue tracker, but I can't see everybody
doing this.

> One thing comes to my mind: there is some code revieving tool on
> Google Code.  I remember that i saw it being used in some other
> project.  It's a bit hidden, but i managed to found some info:
> http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/CodeReviews
> Looks that we need to add our source code to the Google Code to be
> able to use that.
> I think this may be worth considering.  Could we add our source to
> Google Code and see what we can do then?

Of course it's worth considering, but I don't see that cutting
down on the duplicate discussions.

> Another thing: i'd consider adding a policy about separating
> discussion about code and notation: comments on issue tracker should
> be about notation/features (i.e. what should the output be?  What
> syntax do we want to use?) and all comments about code itself (is the
> indentation correct?  Does it pass regtests?) should be done at code
> revieving tool.

I don't see that going well; the people we most want comments from
(i.e. senior developers) are the people who are the least likely
to log into a website and comment there.

Cheers,
- Graham