cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edison Su <Edison...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: non-committer workflow
Date Wed, 01 Aug 2012 22:40:54 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.yadav@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 1:29 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: non-committer workflow
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > Prasanna and I've been playing with the
> http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/RBTools/0.4/RBTools-
> 0.4.1.tar.gz tool for posting the reviews via a command line utility.
> 
> I've a fork of the original tool that works for me:
> https://github.com/bhaisaab/RBTool
> 
> Usage: http://wiki.cloudstack.org/display/gen/Review+Board
> 
> Example:
> git format-patch -o patches HEAD~1
> postreview --username=<user-name> --password=<password> --diff-
> filename=patches/0001-myfix.patch --debug --description="description-
> of-my-patch"  #(add -p if you want to publish right away)
> Test: https://reviews.apache.org/r/6299/
> 
> The patch is uploaded on paste.cloudstack.org and the link is appended
> to the description.

Can we upload the patch to somewhere? The link is an url, you can't directly download it(for
people on windows, there is no wget)

> 
> Hope it works.
> 
> Regards,
> Rohit
> 
> >
> > We can tweak the script easily so when you submit a review request,
> the original git formatted patch is uploaded to some public hosting
> site and will append the link in the description. The committer can
> then get the original patch with all author's info and apply it using
> git am.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rohit
> >
> > On Aug 1, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Prasanna Santhanam
> <Prasanna.Santhanam@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:07:07AM -0400, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> This was tried in the past and backfired when non-committers send
> >>>> through patches that get formatted by mail clients and have CRLF
> >>>> issues when applied by the committer.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I think this happens when people attach their patches, but if you
> send
> >>> them with "git send-email" they will go through just fine.
> >>>
> >>> HTML mail clients and stuff make garbage of patches. That's why I'm
> >>> again HTML e-mail on this mailinglist.
> >>>
> >>
> >> True - it's not necessarily the non-committer sending it through an
> >> HTML client but some of our committers are forced in one way or
> >> another to adhere to Outlook like clients.
> >>
> >>
> >>>> 3) extra workflow step of submitter closing the patch request
> >>>>
> >>>> These probably should be addressed by tooling.
> >>>
> >>> Do you mean reviewboard tooling or tooling for patches through e-
> mail?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I meant reviewboard tooling/fix so it doesn't strip out author
> >> information and so that git am works. Rohit's beaten me to the
> request
> >> with RB's team. It might take too much time before apache infra
> >> decides to upgrade the reviews.a.o though.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Prasanna.,
> >


Mime
View raw message