On 23 November 2015 at 23:01, Donald Stufft firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Nov 23, 2015, at 7:50 AM, Victor Stinner email@example.com wrote:
The UI of Gerrit is atrocious. It’s confusing and ugly. Once you spend the time to grok how it works it can be effective, but that requires sitting down and figuring out how it actually works first and one of the goals of the new workflows is lowering barriers to contributors, not shifting the learning curve from uploading patches to fighting with Gerrit.
I unfortunately have to agree with this - while I *really* like several aspects of the Gerrit workflow (having used it while working on beaker-project.org, rather than OpenStack), to the point of finding pull request based workflows frustratingly clunky and unhelpful for anything that touches more than a few lines of code, Gerrit itself is really designed for cases where you have a highly engaged team using the review system as a combined discussion tool and task tracker, and less towards lowering barriers to review for simple cases.
Pull requests in either GitHub or GitLab will already be an improvement over what we have today with Roundup+Rietveld, and they leave the door open to enabling a more complex *opt-in* review workflow in the future. While there's no counterpart to Reviewable for GitLab that I'm aware of, the merge request API is rich enough to enable one: http://doc.gitlab.com/ce/api/merge_requests.html (or, of course, GitLab themselves may decide to implement it).