Re:Redesigned Conversations
by necubi on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @05:37PM
(#7140307)
This looks nice, but doesn't address my main complaint with the conversation/PR system: there's no way to batch comments.
When doing code reviews, you can sometimes have upwards of 10 or 15 comments. In the current system this means 10 or 15 emails in everybody's inbox. It's also hard to work through a PR without letting everybody know when you're actually finished.
I would love to be able to comment on things as I read through them, then after I finish publish all of the changes and have them go out as one email.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by Newky on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @06:00PM
(#7140457)
Another advantage to this system is that reading and commenting becomes less prone to these sort of comments:
"Where is X defined"
"Ah I see, this is where X is defined, disregard older comment"
A publish system allows you to basically stage comments before publishing. I used rietveld before github and this alongside side by side diffs was killer.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by JoshTriplett on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @06:32PM
(#7140615)
Sounds like you want something closer to Gerrit, where you can do line-by-line code reviews on an entire commit along with an overall comment, and the whole thing goes out as one mail.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by Touche on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @05:50PM
(#7140407)
I don't get any such emails. Maybe I turned it off years ago and forgot about it. Anyways, I wouldn't let an optional setting influence the way you work.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by necubi on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @05:55PM
(#7140433)
To be clear, I find the emails very useful (this is primarily from the perspective of me using Github for work--it's nice to know when somebody has reviewed your code). But I want one, not 15, and after the code reviewer has finished.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by kisielk on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @06:13PM
(#7140527)
I agree this is a big problem. I've had cases where I'm still reviewing stuff but the person whose code was under review just fixed my first few comments and then submitted it while I was still writing the rest.
I know this is partially a process problem, but having batched emails would certainly help make it more obvious.
Google's reitveld is a bit of a mess but at least it gets this part right.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by rob on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @08:28PM
(#7141177)
You can. I had to do this because my GitHub username (like my HN one) is just my name ("rob") and I was getting notifications from people using @rob in their comments/replies instead of the person's actual GitHub username. :)
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by Newky on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @05:58PM
(#7140449)
So I use github enterprise and use the review tool a lot.
It has improved our overall code review experience, but there is a few things which have proved problematic and even have caused major headaches in the last year or so.
1. No Side by Side diffs.
2. Pushing new commits will often collapse conversations from the review. (i.e these conversations are folded)
Really, I want some way to look at my PR and say hey I've addressed all the comments on this pull request, and I am good to merge.
This is not even getting into what happens if you rebase your branch and then force a push to the remote.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by jleader on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @06:38PM
(#7140656)
When things are messy enough that I want to rebase a branch, I generally create a new branch and new PR, and close the old PR with a comment linking to the new PR. I also put a link to the old PR in the description of the new one, so people can easily go back and look at the old discussion.
In other words, rebasing is a big enough change that I feel it's appropriate to restart the PR.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by taeric on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @08:03PM
(#7141063)
If you are linking the requests with a comment on each end, I'm not sure I see the benefit to just pushing the rebase into an open request. Is there a real difference?
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by obsession on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @07:04PM
(#7140772)
This is a good redesign but I wish they put more focus on developing Github Issues. The back button doesn't work (old issues randomly show) and filtering needs work (for example, how can I show issues from two milestones? how about showing issues with no comments? etc.).
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by shurcooL on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @06:39PM
(#7140657)
Am I the only one who dislikes that they made all the fonts slightly larger? I'm working on a 1080p monitor atm and I really don't want more screen real estate taken up with no benefit.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by shurcooL on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @09:21PM
(#7141416)
Interesting. I'm curious, can you share your monitor(s) setup (i.e., size, resolution, DPI scaling if any, OS, etc.) and the type of work you do please?
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by chrismorgan on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @09:35PM
(#7141464)
Just a regular Ubuntu setup on a 15.4", 1680x1050 monitor. I can read it just fine smaller, but larger is marginally nicer. Oh, and have additional styles set in my browser approximating `* { font-family: Ubuntu !important }` (it's not quite that crude a rule, but that's the gist of it)—I tried the rule for a couple weeks, tried it back the original way for a week or so and very quickly went back to forcing the font.
I'm probably best considered a full-stack web developer; but I belong to the camp that shuns body text smaller than 16px.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by plorkyeran on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @07:17PM
(#7140831)
It's very nice in the context of an open-source project to be able to fix formatting and such in people's bug reports, and to be able to update the original report with a more accurate summary of the problem when needed.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by trustfundbaby on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @07:20PM
(#7140844)
The other thing I'd like to see is context on emails in a conversation thread. So if I reply to a comment you've made, it would be great to see the comment I'm replying to IN the email itself (or at the very least, the last comment on that line, if there are multiple comments).
A lot of times I'll get an email comment and have no idea what they're talking about till I click through to go back to the conversation thread
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by reledi on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @10:59PM
(#7141772)
Please do others a favour and don't reply to GitHub comments from email! Many people, including myself, will edit a comment a few times after publishing it. So the comment you're replying to by email would be outdated.
I've gone so far to disable email notifications completely. Which is another win for me because I can't stand being blasted with emails all the time. It's like a never ending to do list which builds up extremely quickly.
Re:Redesigned Conversations
by Toddward on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @09:25PM
(#7141433)
Overall, I like what I'm seeing so far. The notable exception is that they removed the build status indicator for Pull Requests from the PR body and now only show the faint green check next to a commit hash. Makes determining whether a PR is good to merge a bit more difficult IMHO. Hopefully that gets fixed.
When doing code reviews, you can sometimes have upwards of 10 or 15 comments. In the current system this means 10 or 15 emails in everybody's inbox. It's also hard to work through a PR without letting everybody know when you're actually finished.
I would love to be able to comment on things as I read through them, then after I finish publish all of the changes and have them go out as one email.
"Where is X defined" "Ah I see, this is where X is defined, disregard older comment"
A publish system allows you to basically stage comments before publishing. I used rietveld before github and this alongside side by side diffs was killer.
We use http://phabricator.org/ at work and I absolutely love it, but sometimes I'm forced to use GitHub for things and I get sad.
I know this is partially a process problem, but having batched emails would certainly help make it more obvious.
Google's reitveld is a bit of a mess but at least it gets this part right.
It has improved our overall code review experience, but there is a few things which have proved problematic and even have caused major headaches in the last year or so.
1. No Side by Side diffs. 2. Pushing new commits will often collapse conversations from the review. (i.e these conversations are folded)
Really, I want some way to look at my PR and say hey I've addressed all the comments on this pull request, and I am good to merge.
This is not even getting into what happens if you rebase your branch and then force a push to the remote.
In other words, rebasing is a big enough change that I feel it's appropriate to restart the PR.
https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/57
I'm probably best considered a full-stack web developer; but I belong to the camp that shuns body text smaller than 16px.
A lot of times I'll get an email comment and have no idea what they're talking about till I click through to go back to the conversation thread
I've gone so far to disable email notifications completely. Which is another win for me because I can't stand being blasted with emails all the time. It's like a never ending to do list which builds up extremely quickly.
" Upgrade to Normalize v3 #12406 Merged mdo merged 5 commits into master from normalize_v3 about 4 hours ago "
occupy too many space in the web page?