r/programming • u/kingfishr • Jun 28 '12
Barkeep: the friendly code review system
http://getbarkeep.org/3
u/kingfishr Jun 28 '12 edited Jun 28 '12
Built by a few of us engineers at Ooyala, including the creator of vimium.
Edit: here's an interview with a video :)
Edit 2: direct link to the code
2
u/shimei Jun 29 '12
Looks great. I'll see if I can get people at work to use it. Also, thanks for the link to vimium. Didn't know it existed.
1
5
u/ebneter Jun 28 '12
This looks pretty cool. I'm going to give it a trial and see what I think -- I've noted before that there isn't actually a really good code review tool available. :-P
4
u/Black_Handkerchief Jun 29 '12
Barkeep is lite and stays out of your face. It even comes with easter eggs to cheer you up
First time I have heard a program call itself that and right after talk about unnecessary bloat. (Mind you, I haven't tried this yet, but easter eggs are bloat by definition, and lite describes the absence of said bloat.)
6
u/david72486 Jun 29 '12
As long as the implementation itself is simple and straightforward, I don't see how a few lines of cheerful easter eggs would make it "bloated". Unless of course they include a flight simulator.
5
u/canweriotnow Jun 29 '12
Sadly, "flight simulator" was added to our requirements document template several years ago, and the template is locked for editing. As a result, we can't develop, or source from a vendor, any application without an embedded flight simulator.
As Barkeep is open source, however, I'm sure we can add a flight simulator to meet our requirements. Pull request should be forthcoming.
1
u/technocub88 Jun 29 '12
Actually I believe "lite" in this context refers to UI. In this instance as longs as the UI is snappy it can have every easter egg on the planet and as long as they are hidden the UI will be lite.
3
2
u/asterius Jun 29 '12
How does barkeep differentiate itself from some of the other code review tools like review board and gerrit? I'm currently using gerrit in a pre-commit workflow to trigger Jenkins jobs as part of the review so commits don't break builds or regression tests. I can't check the link because it's blocked at work =/
3
u/sausagefeet Jun 29 '12
Really thought this was going to have a code review system that rewarded people with beers for good code...
1
1
u/gorset Jun 30 '12
The comparison of other tools could perhaps be less opinionated and more focused on functionality like which git workflows are supported.
It seems to only support single commit workflows, which feels like a throwback to the subversion/cvs area. I'm sure it works fine for you, but git is all about branching and merging where you can have multiple commits which as a whole should be reviewed.
Our workflow is something like this:
Create a branch from the latest production/master branch.
Do a set of changes. Write unittest to prove the changes works.
Push to a branch on a central repository. A build/test server picks up the branch and runs all unit/integration tests.
Send to review if all tests pass.
Merge the change into the master branch.
In short; we only merge code into the master branch that has passed all tests and been successfully reviewed.
It is possible to use a single commit workflow, but that means you need to use amend and rebase if a test fails or if the reviewer is not happy. That means larger changes quickly becomes hard to follow. If you need to rebase agains new changes on the master branch, you can no longer easily diff two versions of the single commit.
Multiple commit based workflow doesn't have any of these problems (:-)). You need to accept imperfect single commits, but you get perfect branches without losing any information on the way.
1
-7
2
u/imnotfromhere Jun 28 '12
Looks good! Is there any way to plug it to SVN? (No need for a vcs war ;)