On dinsdag 2 juli 2019 13:07:02 CEST Ben Cooksley wrote: > I assume this means most of your new users are people who have never > worked with Github/Gitlab before in that case...
I don't know; it might mean that, but I cannot be sure. I can only report the reactions from my newbies :-) > So in terms of workflow here, what you're saying is that for the > contributors Krita sees, submitting a classical patch file is what is > required to be viewed as non-painful? yes, that's what people tend to want, it seems. > (This is a critical distinction, because there has been an enormous > amount of criticism of the pain Arcanist causes) I've never been able to use arcanist myself... I just could figure out how to make it work for me. > I opened this just now on my system and it gave me no issues (using > both Google Chrome and Firefox). > > It did take a little while to open (around 20 seconds or so from the > moment I hit refresh), but that's to be expected given it is a review > spanning 509 files, with circa 14,500 additions and 7,000 removals, > comprising 382 commits so I think it's doing quite well there to load > the whole lot up and display it nicely with some syntax highlighting > even. > > The only time I managed to make it stall was when switching from > inline diff view mode to side-by-side diff view mode on that review. > Subsequent refreshes loaded fine, and remembered the preference to use > side-by-side view mode without issue. You can open reviews with > /diff?view=parallel appended to the URL to shortcut straight to the > changes view in side-by-side mode. Weirdly enough, gitlab never seems to remember the side-by-side setting for me :-( more than one assignee. > > > > Yes, and we need more than one assignee. > > Can you please explain why your workflow is not suited to using > reviewers and requires use of the assignee field? Is there a place where we can assign multiple reviewers? I haven't found one. -- https://www.krita.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
