[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...}
From: |
Sebastian Reitenbach |
Subject: |
Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...} |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:34:24 +0100 |
User-agent: |
SOGoMail 1.3.11 |
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 12:49 CET, David Chisnall <theraven@sucs.org>
wrote:
> On 14 Feb 2012, at 08:43, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
>
> > Code review is usually done before its commited to the main tree. For each
> > part of the tree, there is at least one, sometimes more maintainers.
> > If you have changes, you figure out, who is the maintainer, and send the
> > patch for review.
>
> There are better tools for this. For a while for Étoilé Nicolas ran
> ReviewBoard[1], which let you upload a diff and let other people inspect it
> against the current svn head. LLVM has a mechanism that works the other way
> and scrapes the llvm-commits mailing list for patches as attachments and
> presents them in a web interface (I'm not sure what this uses, but I could
> find out).
>
> For post-commit reviews, pretty much anything supports showing the diff in a
> convenient way. I usually look at GNUstep changes using viewvc on GNA, which
> lets you inspect a revision, see what has changed, and inspect diffs for
> everything. Fossil has a similar functionality built in (and, because the
> web UI can run locally, you can see the same interface whether connected or
> disconnected). Github has a version that reflects the git philosophy: more
> features, worse UI.
Yeah, there are probably better ways of reviewing code changes prior commit.
This is just to illustrate, how we do it there.
The main point I intended was just with the code review before commit. How its
done, doesn't really matter. If the VCS has something built-in, or there are
good tools available that help in that process, even better. I wasn' t aware of
the ReviewBoard.
But it sounds, you dropped using it, why, the process is still too cumbersome?
>
> > Important here is to send a patch inline, not as attachment.
>
> The down side of this is that mail clients and mailing list software have a
> habit of mangling diffs sent inline, so you often can't apply a diff sent
> this way. You can do code review, but not testing.
Yep, I also had to learn that the hard way. I stopped using thunderbird in
favor of using SOGo web interface, since I did not got Thunderbird to not to
mangle inline diffs :(
But since then, I never had problems anymore with applying diffs from others,
nor that others had problems with my diffs.
Sebastian
>
> David
>
> [1] http://www.reviewboard.org/
>
> -- Sent from my Difference Engine
- Re: GNA is down..., (continued)
- Re: GNA is down..., Quentin Mathé, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., David Chisnall, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., Nicolas Roard, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., David Chisnall, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., Amr Aboelela, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., Eric Wasylishen, 2012/02/13
- Code review [Was: GNA is down...}, Fred Kiefer, 2012/02/13
- Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...}, Sebastian Reitenbach, 2012/02/14
- Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...}, David Chisnall, 2012/02/14
- Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...},
Sebastian Reitenbach <=
- Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...}, Quentin Mathé, 2012/02/14
- Re: Code review [Was: GNA is down...}, David Chisnall, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Pirmin Braun, 2012/02/13
- Re: GNA is down..., Gregory Casamento, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Gregory Casamento, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Matt Rice, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Fred Kiefer, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Quentin Mathé, 2012/02/14
- Re: GNA is down..., Derek Fawcus, 2012/02/14