Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aside: In your opinion what are good issue trackers and code review tools?
I'd also be interested in knowing. I also feel GitHub's issue tracker is not right for a large project like this. As for the code review tools though, I've not yet seen something that I feel is materially better than GitHub + PRs + some bot-enabled automation. I understand that many people _prefer_ things like Gerrit, but I've found the difference to mostly be opinion, and that Gerrit can be a significant problem in…
Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
81–86 of 86 posts
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
GitLab has an explore section https://gitlab.com/explore but it isn't as good as GitHub's one. Both to having less projects and us spending less time on it.
Oh that's nice, found some interesting projects there, thank you. I use all three git sites, I mostly use BitBucket because it was the first one I found with free git repositories, but I use GitLab now for private projects. Thank you again for coming on here and always being willing to respond to anyone asking about GitLab I always appreciated that about you.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
GitLab's threaded, resolvable discussions is very efficient, especially if you enable mandatory resolution before merge, forcing you to create issues for unresolved ones through the related button, guaranteeing you never loose track of something that should be resolved. I have a hard time going back to GitHub because it's so useful.
That's great to hear, I haven't used GitLab for code review before. I struggle to use the rest of GitLab, but it's improving all the time so we might consider it once it's up to the usability of GitHub for the rest of the experience.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
This looks like a good spot to plug Reviewable ( https://reviewable.io ), which addresses the disappearing / untracked comments issues and more, while still integrating with GitHub rather more gracefully than something like Gerrit. While GitHub's PR review tooling has improved in the last year there's still a fundamental difference in philosophy such that Reviewable isn't lacking for customers. :) (Disclosure: I'm th…
I've looked at Reviewable several times, and I'm afraid to say I've never been convinced to try it. There's obviously a huge cost to moving team process over to a new tool like this, but also I just found it more difficult to understand what was going on compared to GitHub reviews, so it wasn't particularly compelling for us. Hope you don't mind the candid feedback!
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#85Kinda scary how de facto Github has become, that external tooling is discouraged. Github is a bad issue tracker, a bad code review tool, an ok wiki and a bad distribution platform. Still, one has to mostly use the whole package to get contributors. (Github has other strengths, though)
BitBucket is plenty popular as well, I run into projects that are on there instead of GH for Python. I kind of prefer BitBucket to GitHub the only thing GitHub does right is their "Explore" section which I don't think BitBucket has (or GitLab?) but that's about it for me. I don't care where one hosts code, as long as it's not some obscure server.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
BitBucket is plenty popular as well, I run into projects that are on there instead of GH for Python. I kind of prefer BitBucket to GitHub the only thing GitHub does right is their "Explore" section which I don't think BitBucket has (or GitLab?) but that's about it for me. I don't care where one hosts code, as long as it's not some obscure server.
BitBucket is my default for pet projects nowadays, and it's also what I typically recommend for professional work. Better pricing, direct access to Atlassian's tools (which have their own issues, but are generally pretty popular), and the "projects" feature is nice (I just wish it was usable for personal repos rather than being an organization-only feature).