[Python-Dev] We should be using a tool for code reviews

[Alexander Belopolsky]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 13:31, Alexander Belopolsky
> <alexander.belopolsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
>> ..
>>> But maybe with Hg it's less of a burden to ask people to use a checkout.
>>>
>>
>> I thought with Hg it would be more of a burden for casual contributors
>> to use a checkout simply because the checkout is many times bigger.
>
> Many times bigger than what? If you mean svn that's not true (the eval
> of the DVCS pegged Hg at only 50% larger than svn).

My experience was different.  I may misremember because I did not try
to use Hg since about a year ago, but the Hg checkout was 3-4x of that
of an SVN branch.   However, my comment was simply a reaction to the
argument that Hg checkout would be *less* of a burden than SVN.

>
> But honestly, the line has to be drawn somewhere. Right now we won't
> take a patch submitted to the mailing list, but accepting patches not
> against a checkout wastes time for everyone involved as soon as it
> doesn't apply cleanly. At that point either a core developer has to
> fix it or (what typically happens) the person has to get a checkout,
> update their patch, and then re-submit. We might as well minimize that
> when possible by really pushing for checkout patches.
>

Well, many patches do not apply cleanly by the time they are reviewed
even when they are originally produced from a clean checkout.   I
actually wonder if it would be appropriate to encourage *reviewers* to
upload the patches to a review tool.   A reviewer is much more likely
to have a clean checkout already than a casual contributor and
oftentimes applying the patch is the first thing reviewers do anyways.
 If a review tool is one command away, it may be even easier to run it
rather than to figure out how to reference the code in the patch in
the roundup comment.