Code review comment for lp:~abentley/launchpad/mp-tweakage

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Martin Albisetti wrote:

> I feel that going down the path of "Add a review or comment" has not been good. Reviewing and commenting are very different things, and mixing them just creates confusion.

Thanks for your review.

Can you explain what makes them different? To me, a review is just a
comment with a little bit of extra information. It forms part of a
discussion, which is why I want people to be able to perform a review in
reply to a comment.

Launchpad which needs us to record reviews, so that it can provide a
better summary. Humans get along fine without the Launchpad metadata,
though having it does improve clarity.

I think part of the confusion is that the dropdown says "-Select-",
implying the user must choose. It should say "Just a comment", "Not a
review", or something like that.

> I think we should clearly separate them into different links, and just distinguish the page it goes to by having the review section collapsed or expanded by default. That way we still allow people to do both, but lead them down two different paths.

I still feel that drawing such a strong distinction, and then showing it
to be unnecessary by allowing people to do either from either page
doesn't seem like a good approach to me.

I should mention that people who reply often don't know whether they're
providing a review or a comment until after they've finished typing it
up. They only know whether they can make a verdict until after they've
fully explored the issues through typing their response up, and become
certain there are no outstanding questions.

If we have separate links, then we should provide them in all the same
places. Everywhere it currently says "Reply", it would have a link for
"Reply as comment" and "Reply as review".

> I also think the way that the links are piled up make it hard to find them. When I have been requested to review, I have a [Review] link, and a "Add a review or comment" very close to it.

As you suggested recently, I'd like to have people choose which request
their review satisfies using a dropdown.

That would mean we could remove the [Review] links, which is what I plan
to do.

> Makes me think that, leaving aside the issue mentioned before, that link should at a very minimum be outside the table.

I can do that, but I deliberately placed it as close to the review
requests as I possibly could, so that when people see the request to
review, it's very easy to respond.

> As for the link to resubmit the proposal, I feel that clicking a link to then click a button is not the best experience. Can't we just have the button (as a link!) on the page?

Resubmitting is a painful process to reverse, so I think it makes sense
to require confirmation.

We should fix 383352, which would make the resubmit page more than
merely a confirmation page.

I understood that links which change state were against our policy.

> In the 3.0 spirit, this seems like something that would go on the global actions portlets we will have on the top-right. Since that template is not yet available, I think we should fix it's current placement, which feels slapped on randomly.

As I explained in the cover letter, resubmit is placed next to the
information that it affects, so it's not random even if that's how it feels.

> I wonder if the right place is where we display commits? That area can be pushed down quite a bit, so I don't know.

I think we should do our best to keep global actions above the fold.
(Replying to a comment is specific to the comment, so it's okay if
*that*'s below the fold.)

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkpzADQACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI05igCfX1z04pTo8aK0+smEPGJzpNrm
1CAAnjJ8++ZdfsK9hNLITkn8kicxHB+6
=MW4n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----