On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:32 AM Bruce Schuchardt <bschucha...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> One thing I find confusing in PRs is whether the person submitting the > request is a committer or not. Non-committers need someone to merge the > PR while committers are just looking for a review and will merge the > changes to develop themselves. > I don't see how PR complicates the process for committers since all work should be on a topic branch and would be merged by the committer after review (PR or Review Board). The process of merging the changes does not change. > I also don't see any way to push a PR to specific individuals for > review. In Reviewboard there is a nice queue of pending reviews that I > can go through. On github they're all mixed together and it's difficult > to tell whether any of them are relevant to me. > While PR doesn't have a nice queue concept it does allow you call out individuals by mentioning them in comments. > I like the idea of a single source of history for reviews but I don't > much like the idea of having to create PRs on a read-only system and > then merge my changes to ASF's repo. Being able to commit directly > seems like a committer perk that your idea would take away from us. > Yes, I wish the PR system was not read only with ASF but having used this proposed method extensively with geode-native I really find it not to have a consistent single place to do reviews of bother peer committers and contributors. Another argument for this proposal is that individual contributors don't have to learn two different review methods to review committer's works nor do they have to change review methods if they are voted in as committers. -Jake
