Return-Path: 
 <cloudstack-dev-return-2867-apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CC58ADD4D
	for <apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Wed,  1 Aug 2012 20:29:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 14962 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2012 20:29:34 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14933 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2012 20:29:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cloudstack-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <cloudstack-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 14924 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2012 20:29:34 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:29:34 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rohit.yadav@citrix.com
 designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender)
Received: from [203.166.19.134] (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM.AU) (203.166.19.134)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:29:29 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,696,1336348800";
   d="scan'208";a="12224310"
Received: from banpmailmx01.citrite.net ([10.103.128.73])
  by SYDPIPO01.CITRIX.COM.AU with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5;
 01 Aug 2012 20:29:05 +0000
Received: from BANPMAILBOX01.citrite.net ([10.103.128.72]) by
 BANPMAILMX01.citrite.net ([10.103.128.73]) with mapi; Thu, 2 Aug 2012
 01:59:04 +0530
From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@citrix.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
	<cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 01:58:47 +0530
Subject: Re: non-committer workflow
Thread-Topic: non-committer workflow
Thread-Index: Ac1wJEtYQZFJDP6EQH2EluOtdp4HXw==
Message-ID: <2033A054-D79D-4D99-8012-BDBF0297E294@citrix.com>
References: <59EF914C-AFDA-4C3F-9F76-3B92F0459E12@gmail.com>
 <501841DE.3000008@widodh.nl>
 <96CD3CC7-C796-4892-90DB-381077D2949E@gmail.com>
 <CAKprHVa0J7hr7dVSPGFuZAvkHJY6+HVoF2tYSzOUz4_y+EC-DQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <B1DF26ECC0458748AC97CECE2DA98D41012F9E65957F@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
 <50191E01.1090302@widodh.nl>
 <9DC7BC0D-9388-4094-AF79-B4B7977E9BFB@citrix.com>
 <20120801125638.GA2940@cloud.com> <501929FB.9010403@widodh.nl>
 <20120801132458.GB2940@cloud.com>
 <61D8F968-0247-4E9D-8B71-7B7CBB8C1F57@citrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <61D8F968-0247-4E9D-8B71-7B7CBB8C1F57@citrix.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0


> Hi,
>=20
> 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=3D<user-name> --password=3D<password> --diff-filename=
=3Dpatches/0001-myfix.patch --debug --description=3D"description-of-my-patc=
h"  #(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 t=
he description.

Hope it works.

Regards,
Rohit

>=20
> We can tweak the script easily so when you submit a review request, the o=
riginal git formatted patch is uploaded to some public hosting site and wil=
l append the link in the description. The committer can then get the origin=
al patch with all author's info and apply it using git am.
>=20
> Regards,
> Rohit
>=20
> On Aug 1, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Prasanna Santhanam <Prasanna.Santhanam@citrix=
.com> wrote:
>=20
>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:07:07AM -0400, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>> 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.
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> I think this happens when people attach their patches, but if you send=
=20
>>> them with "git send-email" they will go through just fine.
>>>=20
>>> HTML mail clients and stuff make garbage of patches. That's why I'm=20
>>> again HTML e-mail on this mailinglist.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> 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.=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>>> 3) extra workflow step of submitter closing the patch request
>>>>=20
>>>> These probably should be addressed by tooling.
>>>=20
>>> Do you mean reviewboard tooling or tooling for patches through e-mail?
>>>=20
>>=20
>> 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.=20
>>=20
>> --=20
>> Prasanna.,
>=20