[webkit-dev] to reitveld or not to reitveld

Joe Mason joe.mason at torchmobile.com
Thu Jun 11 16:50:10 PDT 2009

Mark Rowe wrote:
> On 2009-06-11, at 15:16, Ojan Vafai wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan at google.com 
>> <mailto:ojan at google.com>> wrote:
>>     On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Mark Rowe <mrowe at apple.com
>>     <mailto:mrowe at apple.com>> wrote:
>>         There are also concerns about access to the data store of the
>>         application, backup procedures, etc.  Our existing servers
>>         are well understood in this regard.   We've also found in the
>>         past that having services spread across different systems
>>         causes confusion when something goes wrong, for whatever
>>         reason, as it's not clear who to contact to address the problem.
>>     For what it's worth, we've had next to zero maintenance effort go
>>     into keeping rietveld running on appengine. As far as I know,
>>     it's been pretty much stable and problem free. But I don't
>>     actually maintain it, so I can't say that for sure. :) 
>> It seems to me that all the issues raised with using reitveld are 
>> solvable. Assuming you all are OK with doing this iteratively instead 
>> of needing all the issues to be resolved on day one, I think we can 
>> probably start taking concrete steps forward.
> Given what has been said so far I'm still not clear why Rietvald is a 
> better option than Review Board.
Well, I haven't heard anything concrete on why Review Board is better 
than rveld, either.  All I've seen are some posts saying, "You know, 
Review Board exists too." Is the UI better?  Is the architecture 
better?  Is the design very different?  Is it easier to integrate with 
git?  Exactly how much work is involved in hosting each of these 
solutions?  The only thing concrete I've seen is that Review Board is 
self-hosting, while rveld is tied to AppEngine.


More information about the webkit-dev mailing list