Re: Golang use of gerrit vs github

[Vacelet, Manuel]

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

Hi there,

I found the following thread about golang use of gerrit vs github rather interesting:

https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21956

Most of the comments I read so far claim that Gerrit is superior to GH for it's job (the review part) but nevertheless point out that those advantages are not outweigh by the cost of the learning curve for people (more and more) used to Github and PRs in general.

I know PloyGerrit already address some of the issues with Gerrit Web UI but I'm wondering if there are plans to address the whole UX, including the CLI one so it could be easier for people coming from PR world to understand Gerrit concepts ?

Apologies for the lack of subject to my mail :/ 

[Luca Milanesio]

Hi Manuel,

the good news is *YES*, the Gerrit Community really want to overcome the limitations of the current Gerrit UX.

There will be at the forthcoming Gerrit User Summit in London (2-3 October) at [1] a specific PolyGerrit UX booth all dedicated to get the feedback from the Community and run some user-research experiments to identify the most commonly used user journeys of Gerrit.

On 21 Sep 2017, at 15:48, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

Hi there,

I found the following thread about golang use of gerrit vs github rather interesting:

https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21956

Most of the comments I read so far claim that Gerrit is superior to GH for it's job (the review part) but nevertheless point out that those advantages are not outweigh by the cost of the learning curve for people (more and more) used to Github and PRs in general.

I know PloyGerrit already address some of the issues with Gerrit Web UI but I'm wondering if there are plans to address the whole UX,

yes, see ablove

including the CLI one so it could be easier for people coming from PR world to understand Gerrit concepts ?

What do you exactly mean for CLI ? The git client commands to submit a review?

To be honest with you, the Git operations to push a review to Gerrit are already *way simpler* than the ones to push a review to Phabricator or GitHub.

But I'll have a look at the issue you linked to see if there is more :-)

Apologies for the lack of subject to my mail :/ 

--
--
To unsubscribe, email repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com
More info at http://groups.google.com/group/repo-discuss?hl=en

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Repo and Gerrit Discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Luca Milanesio]

Forgot the [1] link:

[1] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/summit/2017/+/master/location.md

[Darragh Bailey]

Hi Manuel,

At work (primarily because of our work with OpenStack previously), we use git-review and some use gertty to review from the terminal instead of the Web UI, so I'd say the CLI is well supported as it goes.

Is there something you think is missing from a CLI workflow?

--

Darragh Bailey
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"

[Luca Milanesio]

Thanks for sharing the discussion, it is a *really useful discussion* and I believe really makes me thinking ... "WOW, that's the reason WHY I created GerritHub.io a few years ago".

I've shared my feedback in the discussion, but I believe that both "parties" (pro-GitHub and pro-Gerrit) are actually right.

Luca.

[Vacelet, Manuel]

Hi Luca,

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Luca Milanesio <luca.mi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Manuel,

the good news is *YES*, the Gerrit Community really want to overcome the limitations of the current Gerrit UX.

There will be at the forthcoming Gerrit User Summit in London (2-3 October) at [1] a specific PolyGerrit UX booth all dedicated to get the feedback from the Community and run some user-research experiments to identify the most commonly used user journeys of Gerrit.

On 21 Sep 2017, at 15:48, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

Hi there,

I found the following thread about golang use of gerrit vs github rather interesting:

https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21956

Most of the comments I read so far claim that Gerrit is superior to GH for it's job (the review part) but nevertheless point out that those advantages are not outweigh by the cost of the learning curve for people (more and more) used to Github and PRs in general.

I know PloyGerrit already address some of the issues with Gerrit Web UI but I'm wondering if there are plans to address the whole UX,

yes, see ablove

Here the question is more about the very first insights and comments from the thread.

Most first time contributor we encounter for Tuleap project tells us that the cognitive overhead from people coming from Pullrequests world is high.

There is a lot to learn (beside the UI) to contribute to a Gerrit based project.

 

including the CLI one so it could be easier for people coming from PR world to understand Gerrit concepts ?

What do you exactly mean for CLI ? The git client commands to submit a review?

To be honest with you, the Git operations to push a review to Gerrit are already *way simpler* than the ones to push a review to Phabricator or GitHub.

But I'll have a look at the issue you linked to see if there is more :-)

I tend to disagree.

You don't need to be skilled to make a PR: create a branch, push some commits and click on a button.

Need to modify after review: push some more commits in the branch and that's it.

It's far from being ideal from reviewer point of view, for quality of the contribution (quality of each individual commits) but it's simple.

However, as stated in the discussion, it's really "Do I favor first time contributors (simple / ubiquitous)" vs. "Do I favor maintainers (powerful tooling) and regular contributors (different patterns worth to learn)".

Maybe it's not about having a simpler UI but really having a PR experience for new comers within gerrit.

Manuel

[Luca Milanesio]

On 22 Sep 2017, at 08:10, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

Hi Luca,

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Luca Milanesio <luca.mi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Manuel,

the good news is *YES*, the Gerrit Community really want to overcome the limitations of the current Gerrit UX.

There will be at the forthcoming Gerrit User Summit in London (2-3 October) at [1] a specific PolyGerrit UX booth all dedicated to get the feedback from the Community and run some user-research experiments to identify the most commonly used user journeys of Gerrit.

On 21 Sep 2017, at 15:48, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vacelet, Manuel <manuel....@enalean.com> wrote:

Hi there,

I found the following thread about golang use of gerrit vs github rather interesting:

https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21956

Most of the comments I read so far claim that Gerrit is superior to GH for it's job (the review part) but nevertheless point out that those advantages are not outweigh by the cost of the learning curve for people (more and more) used to Github and PRs in general.

I know PloyGerrit already address some of the issues with Gerrit Web UI but I'm wondering if there are plans to address the whole UX,

yes, see ablove

Here the question is more about the very first insights and comments from the thread.

Most first time contributor we encounter for Tuleap project tells us that the cognitive overhead from people coming from Pullrequests world is high.

There is a lot to learn (beside the UI) to contribute to a Gerrit based project.

Yes, it is a different mindset indeed.

However, for people wishing to keep feature branches and doing pull requests, they can still do the same with Gerrit.

I believe the guys from CollabNet made a UX for that workflow, it would be nice to have an official OpenSource plugin for that user-experience.

 

including the CLI one so it could be easier for people coming from PR world to understand Gerrit concepts ?

What do you exactly mean for CLI ? The git client commands to submit a review?

To be honest with you, the Git operations to push a review to Gerrit are already *way simpler* than the ones to push a review to Phabricator or GitHub.

But I'll have a look at the issue you linked to see if there is more :-)

I tend to disagree.

You don't need to be skilled to make a PR: create a branch, push some commits and click on a button.

Same with Gerrit: create a commit, push to "HEAD:refs/for/master".

Typing "HEAD:refs/for/master" isn't a super-difficult-skill IMHO, but I am biased :-)

Need to modify after review: push some more commits in the branch and that's it

With Gerrit you need to know how to add "--amend" to a Git commit: again doesn't seems a very super-difficult-skill IMHO, but I am again biased.

It's far from being ideal from reviewer point of view, for quality of the contribution (quality of each individual commits) but it's simple.

You have forgotten anyway the "preliminaries" for making the pull request, the forking and cloning of the forked repo.

The fork ends up eventually out-of-sync and you start encountering problems.

GitHub GUI hides most of them, and I believe that's the point we should address in Gerrit ... and the PolyGerrit Team is very much aware of that.

However, as stated in the discussion, it's really "Do I favor first time contributors (simple / ubiquitous)" vs. "Do I favor maintainers (powerful tooling) and regular contributors (different patterns worth to learn)".

Maybe it's not about having a simpler UI but really having a PR experience for new comers within gerrit.

Yep, that was my proposal in the first part of the e-mail.

We should have a "Gerrit Pull-request plugin" that mimics the GitHub PR workflow.

Manuel