[erlang-questions] Erlang 3000?

[Masklinn]

On 20 Nov 2008, at 14:03 , damien morton wrote:
> I guess the question is more about code review tools than SCM tools.
>
> I took a look at github, and they have a wiki feature, but not the
> detailed code review features of google-code.
That's probably because in the push-pull workflow github (strongly)  
suggests  it a feature that make full-fledged code review tools  
unnecessary: commit comments (including line by line).

Basically, the workflow with github is that person B forks person A's  
repository, does his thing, commits and pushes to his fork, then sends  
a pull request to A.

Now A usually won't just pull, he'll use github (or straight git) to  
see what was modified and changed and whatever, and he can use  
github's commit comments to perform a review (add suggestions, add  
questions, whatever) and only pull to his (A) main branch when  
everything looks ok with him.

Anyway re code review, I think Tim's both right and wrong. Code review  
are good and core review tools are very nice, but on the other hand  
depending on the workflow you implement (DVCS are much more flexible  
than CVCS on that point) you might be able to easily do code reviews  
without the need for a full-fledged code review tool. Now that's also  
possible with CVCS (Django's team uses the bug tracker to perform code  
reviews on user-provided patches) but DVCS usually make that easier,  
either using specific features or regular emails in a push/pull model,  
or using a mailing list of some sort in a patchbomb model (see  
mercurial), or through some other setup.

In any case, you're right that DVCS themselves don't do code review  
(one might be able to cook up an extension for that e.g. on top of  
queues)