On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:25 PM Miro HronĨok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> 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