[Specifications] Why reviewable.io for code reviews?

asbjornu has just created a new issue for https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications:

== Why reviewable.io for code reviews? ==
The comment by @elf-pavlik in https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/pull/132#issuecomment-322179489, took me to the following statement by @lanthaler:

> it's currently difficult to keep track what has been addressed and what hasn't

I realise I don't have much to say on this as I haven't phoned in on the Hydra conference calls, but I'm not sure I understand this argument.

There's quite extensive review support in GitHub and I haven't seen any of it put to use in this repository. What's missing on GitHub.com, specifically? Filtering based on review status is quite extensive, for instance:

![GitHub Review Status](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12283/29313022-f8a0ea04-81b7-11e7-8ae4-3749d34cdf68.png)

It's also easy to ask for reviews, see who's reviewing a particular PR and their individual review status:

![GitHub Reviewers](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12283/29313050-21084596-81b8-11e7-9bb7-c71402a8b8eb.png)

With the built-in review system, it's also possible to block merging before the review has been passed, for instance:

![screen shot 2017-08-15 at 12 50 18](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12283/29313100-61464a2c-81b8-11e7-8186-6ecf0ea72602.png)

There are so many upsides to using the built-in code-review of GitHub that I don't quite understand the choice to use Reviewable. Can someone please explain them to me? 😃 

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/135 using your GitHub account

Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2017 10:52:04 UTC