Hi, I plan to use Upsource (as well as the rest of team tools) in a new project.
I liked the simplicity and minimality of gogs; OTOH as JetBrains tools don't have the integrations, I had to install gitlab (and it is really big).
To the point: github, atlassian as well as gitlab have a thing called pull request / merge request; well, gogs/gitea has too, but not integrated into the tools. Each of these git hosting vendors calls it a bit differently, and has different APIs to watch / enact on it. But it is basically still the same thing - a request for merging a feature branch into the base.
Upsource now has "merge reviews" as the new feature.
An idea occured to me: isn't it so that Upsource is actually doing the "added value on top of git (or mercurial etc.)" itself? That is, if I want to see diffs /.comment on it etc. I can do it with Upsource. Github etc. allow me to do it in their platforms as well.
OTOH, I browsed through the posts here and many times it was said by JetBrains team that "Upsource is a code review tool, it treats the repo in read-only manner".
But I see many similarities between what github / bitbucket / gitlab / gogs / gitea do on top of git repo and what upsource + youtrack + teamcity offers.
Are there the plan to move the these tools into a more active role (eg. they can support all the added value of keeping issues, knowledge base, repo discussion / review / control flow, and continuous integration that these sites offer on top of any VCS / DVCS themselves; effectively dewcoupling hosting from development flow.
Or, getting concrete: is it feasible that Upsource would be able to write to the repo and so merge review becomes merge request, so that teamcity can understand it and do merge builds as in case od github pullrequests and approved merge review actually does the merge in repo (so I can stop using vendor's pullreq / mergereq and just use Upsource's ones)?