Re: Patchwork patch tracking system
Siva Chandra <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAGyQ6gyKJGTf7gZSPKLgyY8Q8k5XmS5UPv3=8GL830-Q08hJdQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Joel Brobecker <[email protected]> wrote: >> FWIW we (some of the google folk) looked at geritt for LLVM and >> discarded in favor of phabricator. It seemed to solve a lot of the >> problems that we had and allowed communication to and from the mailing >> lists for patches which was key for us as we have a similar review >> style to gcc/gdb/binutils. We didn't want to remove the ability for >> people to send patches to the mailing lists, but yet get a better >> review mechanism for large patches/queuing/etc. > > Thanks for the suggestion! I have to say, from the outside, > phabricator looks like a pretty interesting option. I am essentially an outsider here, and I have not used phabricator. However, the Chromium project uses Rietveld for codereview: https://code.google.com/p/rietveld/ and https://codereview.chromium.org/ IIRC, Diego Novillo setup a rietveld instance for GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/rietveld Chromium-OS project uses gerrit and hence I have used both these tools and my personal choice is rietveld over gerrit by many a mile. Rietveld can be configured to send mails to a watchlist for every patch sent out for review and also for every review posting. Hence, all review logs can still be saved in a mailing list archive. Thanks, Siva Chandra