GitHub code analytics tools

Hi!

We would be happy to contribute on this.

Guillermo,

Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?

What are your objections?

Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you just have visions that code review could be better?

Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use a tool that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating the better tool:)

Dale

I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do one ad-hoc...

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi. 

With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we will have out of the box.

I google a bit and found these nice service http://ghv.artzub.com.

Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.

What other online services you know to analyse github projects?

Phil,

This looks very similar to the code review tool available in GitHub itself ... so the primary difference is in the workflow or do see an advantage that you are reducing the number of overall commits (by using arc?) or ???

Dale

For code reviews, Phabricator and Arcanist  are nice. This is like Facebook for code. Facebook uses this thing internally. As for FB, there are "apps".

Differential is the part of Phabricator for doing the reviews.

The key idea is that you cannot commit to the repo directly.

You use "arc diff" to create a "revision" that you post to the system. You get a number for this. Not a long git commit id, but a real number (e.g. 610).

Code review ensues, where people can put comments etc through a web interface. Comments can be at any level: file, line of code (click and add comment on the line).

We were doing Zend Framework 2 and so PSR-2 standards applied.

There was a check happening before even being able to submit, so be compliant or do not pass. A pain, but ultimately catched a few bugs that could have been nasty.

Once the review is successful, a user with the proper permissions will do an "arc land"

Once arc land was done, the differential landed on the github repo, and the CI could pick it up for official packaging.

All in all, it is a nice workflow when lots of people are working at once on a code base. Also allows to limit the amount of crap ending up in the official repo due to devs not having a clue (happened).

I used the toolset for a project where the developers where remote and it worked well (team size: Belgium 3 people, Romania 10+).

Code was in Github private repo.

https://secure.phabricator.com/

One can look around.

HTH

Phil

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:

Guillermo,

Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?

What are your objections?

Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you just have visions that code review could be better?

Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use a tool that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating the better tool:)

Dale

On 10/27/2016 05:06 AM, Guillermo Polito wrote:

I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do one ad-hoc...

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi. 

With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we will have out of the box.

I google a bit and found these nice service http://ghv.artzub.com.

Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.

What other online services you know to analyse github projects?

Hi!

Guillermo,

Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?

What are your objections?

Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you just have visions that code review could be better?

Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use a tool that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating the better tool:)

Well, that is in fact my point. I'd like to know options and alternatives. If the easiest to setup and use is github's one, ok, that's no problem to me.

What bothers me the most from the github+filetree combination when reviewing a pull request, is that it is a file-based review. And finally you're reviewing the low-level export format, and I get a bit lost... Just dreaming, maybe there is some tool out there where we can just provide a kind of plugin to enhance the review?

But for sure I do not want to do one from scratch :)

Dale

On 10/27/2016 05:06 AM, Guillermo Polito wrote:

I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do one ad-hoc...

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi. 

With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we will have out of the box.

I google a bit and found these nice service http://ghv.artzub.com.

Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.

What other online services you know to analyse github projects?

Hi!

-------- Original Message --------

Guillermo,

Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?

What are your objections?

Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you just have visions that code review could be better?

Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use a tool that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating the better tool:)

Well, that is in fact my point. I'd like to know options and alternatives. If the easiest to setup and use is github's one, ok, that's no problem to me.

Following the github workflow model is probably best for getting started ... just because it is well documented and directly supported by the guthub tools ... as a community, we need to make a shift to this new model (for some) and keeping it simple is good ... over time the github workflow has evolved and tools like the ones Phil was talking about have come into play (for good reasons) but shifting a community process is hard enough ... individual developers have the freedom to set up their projects on gitlab or bitbucket ... but for Pharo kernel adopting the github tools and workflow (in the beginning) makes a lot of sense ..

What bothers me the most from the github+filetree combination when reviewing a pull request, is that it is a file-based review. And finally you're reviewing the low-level export format, and I get a bit lost... Just dreaming, maybe there is some tool out there where we can just provide a kind of plugin to enhance the review?

I mentioned in another thread that I would like to see an amber (or PharoJS) based github filetree browser that allowed one to browse the project code in a familiar Smalltalk browser ... I assume that a project diff browser could be done as well --- I think the web api for github is pretty sophisticated so these kinds of tools would be possible ... I'd think

But for sure I do not want to do one from scratch :)

Haha, yeah ... I've got an amber-based repository viewer that I use on my github.io page .. and it comes complete with a MNU and a debugger ... I would fix the bug, but I think that the having the debugger come is kind of nice ... in a twisted sort of way:)
Dale

[1] http://dalehenrich.github.io/

Dale

On 10/27/2016 05:06 AM, Guillermo Polito wrote:

I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do one ad-hoc...

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi. 

With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we will have out of the box.

I google a bit and found these nice service http://ghv.artzub.com.

Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.

What other online services you know to analyse github projects?

Dale Henrichs-3 wrote

Guillermo,

Apparently you don't like the github browser-based code review tool?

What are your objections?

Do you know of a better tool that is out in the wild or do you just have
visions that code review could be better?

Let me add some thoughts on review tools, not as an argument against anything in this thread, but more like nostalgia for what I have used in the past and would like to see again. What I describe was specifically oriented toward 1:1 peer reviews and self reviews.

VA Smalltalk has a difference browser which has the usual browser top panes (in the case of VA, showing Application, Class, and Method lists) and side-by-side bottom panes showing the two versions of the code for the selection in the top panes. It also has a button that allows you to step through the changes, highlighting each successive difference. (It also has substantial room for improvements!)

The things I like about it are:
- it's live in my image, so all the usual things one can do with Smalltalk are possible
- I can easily review other versions of the artefacts
- I can jump around to follow related artefacts (e.g., look at a changed method called from the current one or vice versa)
- I can remove artefacts from the lists as I finish with them so that my browser works as a structured check list and as I eliminate things I can can see what remains and eventually empty the lists, signifying completion
- I can modify the changes to correct problems with them and then publish an updated change (or in Git terms a new commit)


So, these are some of the characteristics I would like to find in a review tool.

Better tools are always possible, but it is sometimes nice to use a tool
that you didn't have to build from scratch while creating the better tool:)

Dale

On 10/27/2016 05:06 AM, Guillermo Polito wrote:
> I would like to have a good code review tool, before having to do one
> ad-hoc...
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Denis Kudriashov
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi.
>
>     With future transition to github I ask myself what tools we will
>     have out of the box.
>     I google a bit and found these nice service http://ghv.artzub.com.
>     Try to search guillep and then pharo-core. It looks really nice.
>
>     What other online services you know to analyse github projects?
>
>