On 6 Nov 2014 at 12:15, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Personally, I would say incubator would need considerable work before it can become useful for library reviews. Say, if I can made per-line comments on proposed library code, like gerrit does, it would be rather useful. If I can create design issues right away, so that they can be listed later and reviewed, it would be rather useful. It does not appear to me that wordpess post with comments is better than a thread in a mail client. At least mail client allows to collapse a subthread, or delete it.
Github provides an excellent API (https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/comments/) which does exactly as you ask. Even a read only summary of the comments posted about a library would be very useful. And not too demanding on Github if cached via a varnish reverse proxy (i.e. we don't have to pay Github for the bandwidth). I also wouldn't rule out using JSON to live embed the github stream into the Incubator. Github eats its own dog food, so you can make a mashed up Incubator reinterpretation of Github with Incubator semantics. Then people can live review code on the Incubator, and it appears in Github too. This is where I was coming from with having the SC pay for expert advice and consultancy. This sort of web programming pays as well as top C++ programmers, and for good reason, yet it is none of our core competency. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/