Re: Reviews on mailing-list

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2012, 07:26 UTC
Message-ID: <CALkWK0mpzc8jXs5=HhO0Bk78UgwKt+JGOThB6z_4AnEYmz_=+w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+ZXwZOnZZyk_KWmLLLNChWb1R_Av1s5jM4PsLFWKaG8BB+uXQ@mail.gmail.com>

Deniz Türkoglu wrote:

> I have spoken to Shawn Pearce (gerrit project lead, google) and he
> said he is OK with hosting the gerrit instance.
>
> I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

I personally think email is by far the best interface for patches,
reviews, and discussions.  Git patches are very high-volume, and not
everyone can read everything.  People should have the flexibility to
choose the client they'd like to use to read patches and follow-ups;
the freedom to use a scriptable client like Gnus is very important to
me. Primarily, I want people to be able to:
1. Choose what to read, by scripting Gnus to score email that they'd
likely find relevant.
2. Try out new patches on the list, by assigning one keybinding to
git-am a series.
3. Display email the way they like.  Many email clients have features
to run filters through emails.
4. Read patches/ follow-ups offline, while travelling (on a phone, for
instance).  The GMail app, for instance, downloads mails for offline
viewing.
5. Interact with other lists seamlessly (the kernel list, for
instance).  Email is a universal interface on which lists can be CC'ed
easily.

I'm not attacking a specific web interface, but I don't see how any of the following would be possible even with the most advanced web interface. Besides, nobody has made a proper case for using one. Therefore, I'm strongly opposed to the move.

Ram