hdt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: Our fisheye instance is up!
Date Mon, 18 Mar 2013 15:46:55 GMT
Great work Bob!

On 3/13/13 1:44 PM, "Bob Kerns" <rwk@acm.org> wrote:

>Hurray! Thanks, Atlassian!
>We should find a place to link to it.
>I started a review of my own submission. Entirely unnecessary as a review,
>but you can look at the interface for reviewing. You'll need to log in to
>participate in the review; I'm not sure exactly where the option to join
>the review is located, but I did enable the option for anyone to join.
>In my experience, this is most useful when there's discussion needed on
>specific areas. If you click through to the individual source files, you
>can comment on the changed lines by clicking on them and entering your
>I think the current difference between Fisheye's review functionality and
>the full Crucible functionality is that this commenting ability seems to
>limited to lines in the changesets, so it's patch review, rather than full
>code review.
>My suggestion is that we view this as a convenient tool for discussion,
>rather than some process gate / big stick. That is, if one of us wants to
>discuss the specifics of some patch, just start up a review of the
>patch(es), and send an invite to the list. We can send a summary of the
>review when done -- where "done" just means the discussion is over.
>Note that you can upload a patch and initiate a review *before* submitting
>it, if you want input beforehand.
>Unfortunately, this doesn't have the beneficial effect on searching for us
>I'd hoped for, because their robots.txt is all-excluding. I'm not sure why
>that would be. Searching for, e.g. MapReduceNature turns up old Hadoop
>branches. I'm not sure what we can do to improve the situation. Ideas?

View raw message