Re: Patchwork patch tracking system

[Siva Chandra <sivachandra@google.com>]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> FWIW we (some of the google folk) looked at geritt for LLVM and
>> discarded in favor of phabricator. It seemed to solve a lot of the
>> problems that we had and allowed communication to and from the mailing
>> lists for patches which was key for us as we have a similar review
>> style to gcc/gdb/binutils. We didn't want to remove the ability for
>> people to send patches to the mailing lists, but yet get a better
>> review mechanism for large patches/queuing/etc.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion! I have to say, from the outside,
> phabricator looks like a pretty interesting option.

I am essentially an outsider here, and I have not used phabricator.
However, the Chromium project uses Rietveld for codereview:
https://code.google.com/p/rietveld/ and
https://codereview.chromium.org/

IIRC, Diego Novillo setup a rietveld instance for GCC:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/rietveld

Chromium-OS project uses gerrit and hence I have used both these tools
and my personal choice is rietveld over gerrit by many a mile.
Rietveld can be configured to send mails to a watchlist for every
patch sent out for review and also for every review posting. Hence,
all review logs can still be saved in a mailing list archive.

Thanks,
Siva Chandra