...
How will cutover be handled?
GitHub
- Pros
- 1
- Cons
- -1
Gerrit
- Pull requests (reviews in gerrit) are merge based. Scripting / tooling required to have the support for fast-forward merge requests for commits.
- Gitflow provides better workflow management for the Git PR to the trunk and release branches
- Better UI and search capability
- Good collaboration with other community based open source software
- Pull requests that are draft mode needs prefix "WIP" (Work in progress) and need tooling for filtering
- Predefined events for Webhooks
- Simple and easy to understand and onboard
- Checkpoint pull request. This enables to "checkpoint" tasks as they succeed in a way which allows to see results as the pipeline proceeds.
Gerrit
- Sometimes, a workflow policy might mandate a clean commit history without merge commits. In such cases, the fast-forward merge is the perfect candidate. With fast-forward merge requests, you can retain a linear Git history and a way to accept merge requests without creating merge commits.
- Atomic/related changes in all one commit is necessary for context affinity, relativity and granularity to better manage the changes as a set function.
- Submit the change set in the review as "draft" to provide better filtering, visibility and manageability
- Pre-commit code review and comment on diffs
- Rating for the reviews which makes visibility better than looking for comments, especially in an automated workflow
- Better diff ability on the rebase and squash for the review thread, especially when a inline review comments were made to the original / subsequent review submissions.
- Permission model by using tags on top of git set permission which provides CI admins control over the reviews. This helps with consistency and operations, from CI to release.
- Better integration with issue tracking, workflow and automation via webhooks (jira, launchpad etc)
- Better integration with Jenkins
- Customizable webhooks using hooks plugins
- No intuitive UI
- Poor CLI consistency
- Pros
- 1
- Cons-1