Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rohit.yadav@citrix.com
 designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender)
From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@citrix.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
	<cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 20:03:09 +0530
Subject: Re: non-committer workflow
Thread-Topic: non-committer workflow
Thread-Index: Ac1v8pKWC/NvnEMPSbSGGJH3qr7b6A==
Message-ID: <61D8F968-0247-4E9D-8B71-7B7CBB8C1F57@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>
In-Reply-To: <20120801132458.GB2940@cloud.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

Hi,

Prasanna and I've been playing with the http://downloads.reviewboard.org/re=
leases/RBTools/0.4/RBTools-0.4.1.tar.gz tool for posting the reviews via a =
command line utility.

We can tweak the script easily so when you submit a review request, the ori=
ginal 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.c=
om> wrote:

> 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.,