Conversation

Trying to keep track of what GitHub PR review comments were addressed in a pushed commit, which ones you only typed a reply for but still need to push, and which ones are still pending is a complete mess. How teams do code review without Gerrit is honestly unclear to me.

132

Replying to

Sell me on Gerritt! I’ve never understood it.

Replying to

and

Gerrit is designed around submitting and reviewing rebased patch sets. Review data is stored in the repository as Git notes and is connected to the commits. It tracks patches based on Change-Id so rebases are properly tracked as part of patch set history with reviews preserved.

Replying to

and

Gerrit remembers the whole history of changes to the patch set and makes it easily accessible. You can see when review comments were made and it tracks whether the review comments were addressed. Pushing a rebased patch set to GitHub is destructive and isn't properly supported.

Replying to

and

You can look at the history of how each patch was revised on Gerrit. On GitHub, the interface only properly surfaces the current set of commits. There's no way to see what changed across pushes and there's no way to see which comments got addressed or how they were addressed.

Replying to

and

GitHub's workflow requiring you need to make a remote fork of the repository in order to push changes and submit a pull request is also terrible. GitHub is filled with useless unmaintained repository forks since everyone makes one for each project they plan to contribute to.

5:55 PM · Apr 18, 2022Twitter Web App

Likes