On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:25 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 22. 01. 20 13:12, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > I think that it would be more productive if you try to rationalize this opinion. > > I don't want to argue about the feeling you have, but I would be > > interested in comparing notes on what exactly "Gerrit workflow" means > > to you, and whether or not it is the same thing to me. > > Note that I don't describe an experience with a workflow. I am describing a > drive by contributor experience: > > 1. you send a Pull Request over a familiar channel > 2. a bot tells you that you cannot do this and you need to follow this tutorial > instead > 3. you push your code to some place that is far to overocmplicated to navigate > 4. magic happens, there is no way to see what's going on unless you have > experienced this before > 5. you get dozens of bot e-mail you don't understand > 6. eventually hopefully the bot merges the thing > > I realize that (4) might be true about "anything new". What I am trying to say > is that e-mail is a familiar channel. GitHub / GitLab / Pagure etc. almost looks > like a bulletin board or a more code-oriented Facebook comments. However gerrit > is like a nuclear power plant control center -> you are afraid to touch > anything. You need a tutorial to handle it. It's not beginners friendly and it > enhances a cargo cult behavior. OK, I can understand that. Though when people talk about simplicity of the GitHub interface, I usually tend to point at this page: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pulls and the k8s-bot actions there If this page doesn't look overwhelming for you, I don't know what does :) I admit, being a gerrit user for couple of years I actually miss the "nuclear plant" interface, where you can get a full state of a change request in one glance, rather then by browsing through several "Facebook-like" tabs and pages to see the full picture: comments, ci results, files changed, people who need to review the task, their comments,.. And we haven't even started about the CLI interface (git review) it has, which none of GitLab/GitHub things can compete with. So you argument for me sounds like Gerrit is too powerful and too good. Which is a valid argument, actually. We don't want newcomer to go the full speed with it from a day one. The question here is: can we have the power, scalability and feature-richness of a platform like Gerrit, but (optionally) hidden under the hood so that there is a "simple mode" for people who just need a one-time contribution? I've just checked, there is a GitHub plugin [1] for Gerrit which manages the integration. Could it be the option? [1] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/ -- Aleksandra Fedorova bookwar _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
