Gregory's Server@marcan Email sucks (and is broken), that's a fact. As a maintainer it's manageable with things like lei and b4, but would be nice with a different backend than email.
Various core maintainers do already share your sentiment. There's no great solution so far though, unfortunately. Personally I would still much rather review patches in email than some horrid github/whatever web interface. But I realize that email isn't for everyone, and am happy to try and be flexible.
@axboe Note that these systems do have APIs, so it's not like you can't build alternate clients for them (and people do). But I'm actually curious, what do to find horrid about the web interfaces? I mean it takes some getting used to of course, but other than that?
Besides avoiding the pain of the email process, there are lots of little benefits. Stuff like being able to see at a glance what's reviewed and not, whether the reviews come from owners or third parties, batching of review feedback until you finish with all the commits (so you can go back and edit things before sending), the edit buttons everywhere in general even after sending, being able to directly send mergeable suggestions to the submitter, integrated CI that can block merging if desired, much more structured metadata to search/organize/tag things by, much easier integration with bots for custom processes, the fact that *all this state is shared* so individual people don't have to re-invent state extraction and management tooling for private use, ...
@axboe Note that these systems do have APIs, so it's not like you can't build alternate clients for them (and people do). But I'm actually curious, what do to find horrid about the web interfaces? I mean it takes some getting used to of course, but other than that?
Besides avoiding the pain of the email process, there are lots of little benefits. Stuff like being able to see at a glance what's reviewed and not, whether the reviews come from owners or third parties, batching of review feedback until...