Jan,

The tool is ReviewBoard http://www.reviewboard.org/

Here's the original thread that I was thinking of for reference https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2924.

There are quite a few Gerrit vs (everything else) posts out there and ReviewBoard would go a long way toward helping put in a lot of what I would like to see but it's (in my opinion) still not as powerful as Gerrit.

Trevor


On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Trevor Vaughan"
> Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 3:08:13 PM
>
> Absolutely!
>
> So, patch reviews are made easier by the following:
>
> GitHub
>
> 1) Syntax highlighting
> 2) Inline commenting that persists over time
> 3) Immediate tracing of tickets to code via hashtags
> 4) Notification of individuals and groups via directed responses (@)
> 5) Easy raw file downloads
>
> Gerrit
>
> 1) Syntax highlighting
> 2) Inline commenting that persists over time
> 3) Forced clean history based on Gerrit rules
> 4) Complete tracking of revision history (GitHub doesn't give you this)
> 5) Ability to restore abandoned changes if necessary
> 6) Authoritative, uncorruptable (unless you allow direct pushing)
> repository.

Thank you for your time, Trevor. Looking at that list of such handy
features I would say it's definitely worthy to give the move a try.

>
> If I remember correctly, FedoraHosted will not use any product not packaged
> with RHEL/Fedora and Gerrit proved to be too difficult to package for
> whatever reason.

Yes, other thing to consider (from further look) looks it might not be
that easy / straightforward to create own Gerrit instance:
  https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2924

Looks not to be present even in OpenShift yet:
  https://www.openshift.com/content/instant-application-gerrit-code-review

So if we wanted the power of Gerrit, we either need to:
* move to GitHub,
* administer our own SSG specific instance (another resources consumption)

>
> There is another Gerrit-like system that the FedoraHosted systems can use
> but I didn't find it to be as powerful as Gerrit when I last tried to use
> it.

Which concrete one you have meant -- got the links? (couldn't find anything
like that, but maybe my queries have just wrong keywords)

Thank you && Regards, Jan.
--
Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Technologies Team

>
> Thanks,
>
> Trevor
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:05 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <jlieskov@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello Trevor,
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Trevor Vaughan"
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 2:12:52 AM
> > >
> > > Honestly +1 here.
> > >
> > > I have pretty much all of my repos hosted under Github and their patch
> > and
> > > review process is *easy*
> >
> > Can you be more specific what makes that patch review process easy?
> > Anything
> > else behind having the patch review handled via Gerrit?
> >
> > > particularly when combined with the new Gerrit
> > > system that's free for FOSS projects.
> >
> > So would just request Gerrit instance for SSG project via the Fedora
> > infrastructure
> > solve our obstacles? [*]
> >
> > Thank you && Regards, Jan.
> > --
> > Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Technologies Team
> >
> > [*] You to understand I am not against moving to GitHub. Just trying to
> > identify
> >     the difference / advantages / improvements, and if some of them would
> > be
> >     doable without the move to GitHub (less requirements for the time /
> > resources
> >     wrt to actions related with the move)
> >
> > >
> > > Trevor
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Ronald < mini.pelle@gmail.com > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > from a personal perspective, as a github users (read biased opinion),
> > I've
> > > been refrained from contributing and publishing diffs because:
> > > - the process of patch approval was not clear,
> > > - communication around a patch is made difficult by mail (which are
> > already
> > > follinwg throughout the days)
> > > - current open issues are not listed and cannot be discussed by the
> > community
> > > (to propose patch for instance)
> > >
> > > I have the feeling that a move to github would make lots of things clear
> > for
> > > global collaboration. Although, the fact that the project is hosted at
> > > fedora is a good quality stamp/branding :)
> > >
> > > my two cents.
> > >
> > > Ronald
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Shawn Wells < shawn@redhat.com > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/8/14, 10:16 AM, Trevor Vaughan wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Just out of curiosity, what happened with this in the end?
> > >
> > > I just noticed a few more suggestions that Github-style pull requests
> > would
> > > be really useful.
> > >
> > > There were valid opinions expressed for both staying on FedoraHosted and
> > > migrating to GitHub. So, effectively, a stalemate.
> > >
> > > The SSG community has grown amazingly -- both in contributors and usage
> > --
> > > and because of this success Red Hat is preparing to ship SSG in future
> > > versions of RHEL [1]. This exacerbates the need for a manageable
> > ticketing
> > > system with easy patch submission as very shortly every RHEL installation
> > > will have a copy of SSG. FedoraHosted simply wasn't designed to include
> > the
> > > same tooling and developer ecosystem as afforded on GitHub (and that's
> > NOT a
> > > ding against it's designers!).
> > >
> > > The community is a coalition of the willing. Our shared purpose drives
> > the
> > > community, and I strongly feel the need to build out tools that will
> > allow
> > > us to scale. I'm concerned -- likely overly so -- at how to prepare for a
> > > wave of interest once we begin shipping in RHEL.
> > >
> > > With that said, who am I to *mandate* the migration to GitHub? Admittedly
> > > part of me wants to just go ahead and do it, however that could come at
> > > making a non-trivial amount of people (esp. committers, who would be
> > > effected by the change) feel alienated/ignored. Certainly we can't make
> > > everyone happy all the time, though.
> > >
> > > Thoughts would be *most* welcome.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ show_bug.cgi?id=1038655
> > >
> > >
> > > ______________________________ _________________
> > > scap-security-guide mailing list
> > > scap-security-guide@lists. fedorahosted.org
> > > https://lists.fedorahosted. org/mailman/listinfo/scap- security-guide
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > scap-security-guide mailing list
> > > scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Trevor Vaughan
> > > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
> > > (410) 541-6699
> > > tvaughan@onyxpoint.com
> > >
> > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > scap-security-guide mailing list
> > > scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org
> > > https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Trevor Vaughan
> Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
> (410) 541-6699
> tvaughan@onyxpoint.com
>
> -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
>



--
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699
tvaughan@onyxpoint.com

-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --