As a recommendation from our QA team, we are maintaining a single master branch in our project and all the team members are checking in to master branch directly. This way the Continuous Integration is simple since it runs on the master and we have all the UT, sanity tools etc. attached to the CI and everything is in place. But the problem is with code reviews. How does the team members raise for code reviews since the everybody checks in frequently to master, for the reviewer it's a challenge to review only one particular authors/feature code. Any alternatives other than having individual branches?
If you need to review only single commit then I see no issues here.
But if you need to review several commits mixed with commits from other people, there is no way to divide your changes from other people, especially if you modified the same file. In case you modified different files FishEye allows you to choose commits and review only them
Do you have Crucible too, or just Fisheye? If you have Crucible and you use individual issue keys for every commit, have the change author create a review by adding multiple changesets (pretty easy if you filter by the issue key in the "add content" dialog).
But as Alexey pointed out, if changes are related to the same file, you will get the changes mixed up in the review. The non-review related changes will be indicated in the UI though.
...word of mouth, so by 2016, we were working with several other entities on campus to implement Jira Service Desk . The Atlassian motto of “for every team” has really come true for us in this case. We...
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!Find a group
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!
Unfortunately there are no AUG chapters near you at the moment.Start an AUG
You're one step closer to meeting fellow Atlassian users at your local meet up. Learn more about AUGs
We're bringing product updates and pro tips on teamwork to ten cities around the world.Save your spot