►
From YouTube: UX Showcase - Merge Request Restructure
Description
Annabel Dunstone Gray walks though the current status of the merge request restructure, including results from the latest round of solution validation as well as next steps.
A
Hi
I'm
Annabelle
gray
and
I'm
a
senior
product
designer
on
the
code
review
team
and
today
I'm,
going
to
walk
through
the
current
status
of
the
merge
request,
restructure
effort,
focusing
specifically
on
the
two
features
that
we've
been
testing
most
at
the
moment,
which
is
the
comments
Tab
and
the
activity
filters.
So
quite
a
few
of
you
are
probably
already
aware
of
this
effort
and
have
been
a
part
of
it.
A
Validation
with
external
users
and
I'll
just
go
through
the
tasks
that
we
did
and
then
talk
about
the
future
of
it.
What
worked
and
what
didn't
work
and
then
yeah
actually
I,
think
that'll,
be
it
so
to
start
with
this
prototype
is
something
that
the
basic
structure
was
kind
of
I
think
a
few
months
ago
that
Pedro
did
and
it
worked
really
well.
It
looked
like
something
that
was
similar
enough
to
our
current
UI,
but
it
helped
it
helped
with
navigation.
A
It
helped
separate
the
concerns
a
little
bit
better,
but
I
wanted
to
know
if
it
worked
with
a
real
gitlab
merge
request,
one
of
the
really
big
messy
ones
like
the
worst
case
scenario,
so
I
found
one
that
18
changes
it
it
went
through.
I,
don't
even
know
how
many
rounds
of
review
many
many
rounds
of
review,
Loops
open
for
at
least
one
or
two
milestones,
and
you
can
see
by
the
27
pipelines
that
you
know
it
was
continually
pushed
to,
and
there
are
80
comments
on
it
right
now.
A
A
I
I
opened
every
single
thread
because
that's
what
you
would
have
to
do
if
you
were
looking
for
a
comment
right
now,
and
this
kind
of
gives
you
an
idea
of
how
messy
I'm
just
gonna
I'm
gonna
zoom
out.
So
you
can
see
the
whole
merge
request.
It's
it's
this
long
and
it
just
keeps
on
going
and
it's
impossible
to
find
anything.
A
We're
squashing
commits,
and
it's
just
it's
so
much
noise,
and
you
can't
remove
any
of
these
so
they're.
Just
there
they're
now
a
permanent
addition
to
the
merge
request
and
it
makes
it
really
difficult
to
review
so
I
took
all
of
this
information
and
put
it
into
this
prototype
and
try
to
filter
the
activity
down
into
what
I
consider
more
sensible
defaults.
A
So
if
you
land
on
a
merge
request
in
this
new
prototype,
you
might
see
something
like
this,
and
this
is
this
is
where
it
ends
on
the
activity
View
and
it's
filtered
only
to
comments,
merge,
request,
reviews
and
approvals
and
I
think
that's
it
so
now
I'm
just
going
to
walk
through
what
we
asked
the
the
users
to
do
in
our
testing.
The
first
task
was
you
know?
What
do
you
see?
Are
you
doing
anything
different?
A
Most
people
didn't
really
notice
a
difference,
but
we
asked
them
to
please
filter
the
activity
by
only
approvals
and
so
to
do
that.
You
would
click
on
here
and
remove
some
of
these
presets
and
then
apply
filters
and
already,
if
you're,
you
know
a
reviewer
coming
in
at
the
end
of
this
merge
request
process.
A
This
might
be
a
really
helpful
view
to
see,
and
then
we
ask,
can
you
now
filter
by
who,
let
me
think
I
think
it
was
kushal
and
Dylan,
and
then
you
are
able
to
filter
straight
from
there
from
here.
We
asked
users
to
find
that
most
recent
approval
and
open
the
thread.
This
is
another
thing
that
no
one
had
any
problems
doing
to
do
that.
You
would
just
click
on
this,
and
then
you
take
into
the
comments
Tab,
and
here
you
can
see.
You
are
now
filtered
to
every
comment
that
kushal
has
made.
A
This
is
that
most
recent
review,
and
then
this
is
a
completely
separate
comment
that
he
made,
and
we
also
have
this
sort
of
split
pain,
view
kind
of
similar
to
slack
where
you
can
kind
of
toggle.
Well,
not
toggle.
You
can
just
select
from
this
sidebar
which
comment
you
want
to
see
and
it
would
show
up
here
with
the
full
context.
A
If
you
want
to
post
a
general
comment,
you
would
go
to
the
overview,
Tab
and
scroll
to
the
comment
box
and
post
it.
So
some
users
did
try
and
do
that,
but
we
don't
have
that
comment
box
on
the
overview.
Tab
anymore,
you
actually
have
to
click
on
this
button
right
here,
which
opens
the
comment
box.
A
lot
of
users
were
well
a
lot.
We
only
talked
to
five.
Some
people
were
confused
about
where
this
comment
was
going
to
go.
Is
it
going
to
go
in
this
thread?
A
Is
it
going
to
be
attached
somewhere
here
or
is
it
going
to
be
a
general
comment?
It's
not
exactly
clear
from
this
view.
So,
let's
just
say
it
worked
out,
they
post
their
comment,
and
this
brings
me
to
the
next
problem,
which
is
once
you
post.
That
comment:
where
did
it
go
you're
still
filtered
to
push
all.
So
your
comment
doesn't
show
up
here,
I
added
toast
here,
but
this
is
something
that
we're
going
to
need
to
explore
a
lot
further,
because
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
clear
the
filter.
A
When
you
post
a
comment,
maybe
we
need
to
rethink
the
filter
on
the
comics
tab,
all
together,
not
sure
yet,
but
for
now
you
would
click
here
and
then
your
comment
was
posted
and
it's
now
filtered
to
every
single
comment
and
you
would
be
able
to
scroll
through
here
to
navigate
all
those
comments
from
here.
We
wanted
users
to
filter,
to
let's
say,
for
example,
you
wanted
to
know
what
appsec
thought
about
this
merge
request
and
you
thought,
okay,
let
me
see
what
Nick
Malkin
said.
A
So
you
would
click
that
filter
to
only
his
comments
and
then
our
final
task
was
to
respond
to
this
thread,
and
users
didn't
really
have
too
much
trouble
figuring
out
that
you
can
scroll
and
then
post.
Your
comment
here
and
then
it
would
show
up
right
here
and
then
you
would
be
added
as
a
user
in
that
thread
and
the
filter
wouldn't
change,
because
you're
responding
to
a
thread
that
the
user
is
already
filtered
to.
If
that
makes
sense.
A
This
brings
up
an
interesting
feature.
Actually
some
people
were
not
confused,
but
they
were
thinking
that
you
should
automatically
scroll
to
this
reply
box.
If
you
click
on
that
thread
and
then
one
person
was
like
oh
I,
guess,
if
I'm
going
to
reply,
then
I
probably
should
read
the
entire
thread.
First,
someone
I,
don't
know
if
it
was
my
PM
Kai
or
if
it
was
Pedro,
but
someone
mentioned
slack.
A
Does
this
kind
of
clever
thing
that
I
didn't
even
notice
and
it
would
be
really
awesome
if,
if
we
were
able
to
do
it
too,
but
if
you
are
going
to
a
new
thread
that
you've
never
participated
in,
you
should
probably
start
at
the
beginning.
You
should,
if
you
click
on
this,
you
should
be
dropped
on
the
beginning
of
the
thread,
because
you
need
to
read
it
all
and
then
you
can
comment.
But
if
you've
already
commented
on
that
thread,
let's
say
this
was
my
comment
right
here.
A
A
You
can
go
back
to
what
we
currently
have.
But
adding
these
filters
makes
it
so
much
better
for
so
many
different
types
of
users,
depending
on
where
you
are
in
the
merge
request
process,
depending
on
your
role,
for
example,
if
I'm
doing
a
ux
review,
I
I
don't
need
to
see
a
lot
of
this
most
of
it.
I
would
say
I
like
to
see
some
comments,
maybe
some
approvals,
but
I
don't
need
to
see
most
of
it.
A
Mostly
the
the
user
filter,
was
obviously
useful
in
its
own
way
as
well,
but
I
think
the
action
filter
is
something
that's
really
going
to
help
Focus
the
reviewers
mind
basically
and
you're,
going
to
be
able
to
see
what
you
want
to
see
every
time
and
then
this
would
persist
across
every
merge
request.
So
you
once
you
select
your
filters.
If
you
go
to
another
merge
request,
it
will
show
those
same
filters.
A
Other
things
that
I
think
we
can
move
forward
with
is
using
Color
to
call
out
certain
pieces
of
activity.
These
colors
are
not
accurate
because
we
don't
use
green
for
emerge
to
concrete
blue.
So,
let's
say
merged
would
be
like
a
dark,
blue
and
the
approvals
could
be
a
light
blue
or
just
using
something
to
call
out
more
important
pieces
of
activity,
because,
right
now
every
system
note
is
styled
the
same.
A
So
this
is
going
to
help
with
that,
and
the
third
thing
I
would
love
to
figure
out,
but
I
don't
know
if
it
can
happen
in
the
beautifying
UI
effort
is
to
somehow
Group
reviews,
well,
just
Group
reviews
so
simultaneously
to
this
effort,
we're
working
on
review
rounds-
and
this
is
kind
of
borrowing
features
from
that
in
that
I.
Have
this
reviewed
system
note
which
we
don't
currently
have,
and
this
would
just
be
someone
who
submitted
a
batch
comment
review
in
this
case.
A
It
was
two,
but
they
didn't
approve
it
right
now.
It
just
shows
up
as
comment
comment
comment
and
then
they
they
remove
themselves.
So,
ideally,
if
we
could
group
all
that
somehow
I
don't
know
how,
yet
it
would
help
again
kind
of
organize
these
reviews.
It
would
help
both
the
author
and
the
reviewer
and
subsequent
reviewers
figure
out
what's
going
on
in
the
murder
quest,
so
that
would
be
a
cool
feature
to
have,
but
that's
probably
not
going
to
happen
soon,
but
it
will
happen
at
some
point.
A
So
yeah
I
think
that
kind
of
wraps
everything
up
that
I
was
going
to
talk
about
and
if
you
have
any
questions
or
comments,
that
would
be
great
and
also
I
just
wanted
everyone
to
just
see
what
we're
working
on
as
well
like
I,
said
at
the
beginning,
because
it
does
affect
so
many
groups
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
forgetting
things
that
are
important
to
other
people
yeah.
Thank
you.
B
I
think
I
have
the
first
question
here
for
mode
stream.
We
noticed
that
when
somebody
adds
an
item
to
a
merge
strain
and
for
some
reason
because
of
failure
for
pipeline
diet
and
gets
dropped
and
does
not
get
merged,
we
show
on
the
audit
trail
that
we
mentioned
the
name
of
the
person,
maybe
the
trigger,
or
the
the
author
of
The
merger
Quest
and
write
that
they
like
took
this
out
of
the
military
like
in
a
different
language,
of
course.
A
Right
I
think
we
saw
something
about
that
recently
because
yeah,
it's
not
the
author,
removing
it
from
the
merge
train
and
that's
what
we
just
say
yeah
that
would
be.
That
would
be
great.
It
would
be
cool
if
we
could
do
system
and
Bots,
because
yeah
I
think
the
Bots
might
be
a
git
lab
the
company
problem
and
that
we
have
so
many
of
them.
I,
don't
know
if
many
other
companies
have
like
20
different
ones,
continually
posting
on
merge
requests,
but
system
seems
like
something
that
we
could
definitely
do.
A
C
I
loved
what
you
did
with
the
filters
and
a
lot
of
you
know
that
I'm
spending
a
lot
of
time.
Thinking
about
filters,
filtering
and
I
love
how
you
you
know
really
tight
space.
You
I
think
you
use
them
really.
Well,
where
you
it
says
you
actually
show
the
label
the
first
selection
plus
two
other
things
selected.
I.
C
Think
that
works
really
well
in
in
a
case
like
this
and
then
I
asked
about
the
Persistence
of
filters
and
if
it
was
validated
with
users
but
then
Austin
actually
replied,
the
persistence
is
the
behavior
today,
which
I
didn't
know
what
I'm
thinking
is,
even
though
I
think
you
did
a
good
job
with
how
these
filters
are
used
in
this
particular
part
of
the
screen.
I
think
it's
quite
easy
to
miss
them,
because
they're
they're
not
really
prominent
right,
especially
on
a
huge
merge
request.
A
Yeah,
that's
interesting
that
you
brought
that
up
because
we
did
have
a
user
say
they
didn't
love
the
way
it
looked.
They
suggested,
like
I,
think
they
used
the
term
bubbles.
They
wanted
to
see
like
bubbles
with
all
the
filters
which
I
took
to
main,
like
labels
almost
like,
you
could
see
them
all
listed
and
then
you
could
just
X
them
all
out.
If
you
wanted
to
change
it,
I
think
that
might
take
up
too
much
room,
but
I
I
see
your
point
I'm
wondering
if
we
could
focus
it
more
like
for
the
comments.
A
A
This
is
why
you're
not
seeing
all
the
comments,
because
it's
focused
to
this
person,
so
if
we
did
something
like
that,
that
might
need
to
go
through
more
of
like
a
foundations,
building
out
a
new
style
of
filter
where
it
calls
it
out
more
I'm,
not
sure
if
that
would
work
yet,
but
I
forgot
yeah
thanks
for
bringing
that
up,
because
we
did
receive
feedback
on
how
we
can
show
filters
and
I
know.
We
have
similar
issues,
maybe
with
issue
boards
on
that.
A
If
you
Scope
an
issue
board
to
a
certain
things,
I
don't
know
if
it's
still
like
this,
but
previously
we
just
showed
like
a
blue
dot.
That
shows
it
doesn't
show
anything.
It's
just
a
blue
dot
and
that's
supposed
to
signify
that
we're
scoping
this
board
to
certain
filters
and
it's
not
necessarily
clear
and
it
doesn't
draw
the
eye,
maybe
in
the
way
that
we
might
hope
but
yeah,
something
to
definitely
think
about
as
well.
D
Yeah
I
I
also
didn't
realize
that
persistence
was
already
the
current
state
anecdotally
when
you
shared
this
I
assumed
that
the
filters
would
not
persist
between
Mrs,
so
I
think
it
was
a
great
topic
for
mate
to
bring
up
I.
Have
the
next
comment,
which
is
I
love,
seeing
how
you
thought
through
this
Annabelle,
this
was
really
cool
to
watch.
So
thank
you
for
sharing
love,
how
you're
focusing
on
the
visual
hierarchy.
D
But
then
you
used
research
to
figure
out
what
you
could
be
more
confident
about
what
seemed
riskier
and
the
things
that
you're
more
confident
about
like
well,
we
could
go
ahead
and
start
iterating,
that's
where
we
start
our
iteration
that
aligns
beautifully
with
the
conversation
we
had
yesterday
in
ux
weekly
about
how
we
should
be
approaching
mvcs
so
really
a
nice
case.
Endpoint
example
appreciate
it.
A
And
if
anyone
else
had
questions
about
the
filters,
persisting
I
think
the
ones
that
we're
talking
about
are
right.
Now
you
can
filter
by
history
or
comments
or
both
and
it
defaults
to
both.
If
anyone
didn't
know
that
you
could
choose
to
do
one
of
the
two
and
we
can
also
sort
your
activity
by
most
recent
or
oldest
at
the
top,
and
that
persists
as
well.
E
E
If
I
don't
know
that
Nick
Malcolm
is
a
security
engineer,
I
don't
know
if
you've
considered
something
like
roles,
but
I
mean
you
know,
because
we
all
get
pinged
on
a
lot
of
ux
requests
and
I.
Don't
know
if
the
Mr
author
would
know
that,
like
oh
Becca
she's,
the
ux
person,
so
I
don't
know
if
you've
considered
like
I'm,
not
saying
this
is
easy,
but
some
kind
of
like
role
or
label
there.
So
you
can
like
filter
by
you,
know
ux.
A
Yeah
in
question,
so
yeah
I
think
some
teams
are
working
on
roles,
but
that
also
sounds
like
it
aligns
with
what
I
was
hoping
to
do
with
review
rounds.
Where,
ideally,
let's
say
you
open
a
merge
request
and
it
touches
front-end
back-end
files,
and
you
know
how
we
have
that
code
owners
thing
that
pops
up
already
and
it
says
you
know
you
need
you've,
touched
these
files,
it's
back
and
front
end
and
ux.
A
Let's
say
I
would
love
it
if
it
would
kind
of
populate
in
the
sidebar
like
as
empty
States,
you
need
ux
front
end
and
back
end
and
then
database
or
whatever
else
you
touched.
If
we
could
do
that
in
some
way,
then
that
could
filter
into
here
too.
So,
instead
of
filtering
by
user,
maybe
you
could
filter
by
ux
in
because
the
merge
request
touched
a
certain
file
like
a
front-end
file.
It
would
know
that
ux
was
needed
and
we
would
add
those
two
together.