On 01/29/2015 10:34 PM, Thomas Lübking wrote:
Given the multiple concerns on the gerrit webfrontend (not only in this kcd thread) I however also assume that it should be not too hard to get a serious improvement upstream. That includes "If we endup w/ a -hypothetical- decision between 'powerful, but the webfrontend sucks' and 'pretty ui, but the backend seriously falls short', i'd be happily willing to help on an improvement here". (At least from my POV, it should be simpler to fix some GUI than to get a well scaling replication and CI backend - by the order of some magnitudes ;-)
Maybe, but this is actually something I like from the Phabricator proposal: It provides an impression of our relationship with Phabricator upstream, which it says is a good and constructive one. In my experience, this is worth tons. Consider the switch we did from autotools to CMake, where CMake partly won out over other solutions because upstream really wanted to work with us and did. We had similar luck with gitolite, where upstream did a ton of real feature work to address our needs. Redmine/Chili helped us a little bit, too, actually. So keep in mind that "we need to fix this if we adopt it" takes manpower, and historically, we've relied to some degree to getting that manpower *from upstream*. This is is in my book a world of difference from "upstream might accept our patches ... maybe". Cheers, Eike
