The Review Review

Posted on Thu 07 October 2021 in talk-submissions • 3 min read

This is a talk I submitted¹ to DevConf.CZ 2022, which used a non-anonymized CfP process via Red Hat’s CfP website. For that conference, it was selected as the lead talk in the Modern Software Development track. I had previously submitted this talk to DevOpsDays Tel Aviv 2021, which used a non-anonymized CfP process via PaperCall. That submission was rejected.

Title

The Review Review: comparing code review, testing, staging and deployment across development collaboration platforms

Elevator Pitch

You have 300 characters to sell your talk. This is known as the “elevator pitch”. Make it as exciting and enticing as possible.

GitHub, GitLab, Gerrit — what should I choose? What’s the best review process, the best CI/CD integration, the best deployment facility? Which should I select for my startup, or consider migrating to? Which supports good collaboration practices, which bad ones? This talk gives the run-down.

Talk Format

What format is this talk best suited for?

Talk (~25-40 minutes)

Audience Level

Who is the best target audience for this talk?

Intermediate

Description

The description will be seen by reviewers during the CFP process and may eventually be seen by the attendees of the event. You should make the description of your talk as compelling and exciting as possible. Remember, you’re selling both the organizers of the events to select your talk, as well as trying to convince attendees your talk is the one they should see.

In DevOps, the process of collaborative review, testing, staging, and deployment to production constitutes a core element of the work we do. And we generally strive to make this process as effective, efficient, smooth, and transparent as possible. Achieving that partly comes from the work culture we shape and inhabit, partly from our selection of tools — and of course, work culture and work tools permanently and closely influence each other. This goes for both the tools that drive review, and the tools that drive CI/CD:

the GitHub Pull Request process in combination with GitHub Actions;
the GitLab Merge Request process in combination with GitLab CI;
the Gerrit Review process in combination with Zuul.

None of these is perfect, all of them have their advantages and disadvantages under particular circumstances. Some are meant to be used principally as a service, some are fine to self-host. Some are adamant about enforcing specific deployment practices, some follow a more relaxed approach.

This talk is a summary of the current state of affairs with all these tools, and contains recommendations on what to use under which circumstances.

Notes

Notes will only be seen by reviewers during the CFP process. This is where you should explain things such as technical requirements, why you’re the best person to speak on this subject, etc…

My team and I have worked with all tools mentioned in a professional capacity, and I believe I’ve got a very good understanding of the relative merits of the systems presented. This does not include a hard-and-fast recommendation for one particular tool or platform.

This is a talk that’s suitable for both in-person and on-line events.