On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Ted, > > I agree the formatting of the reviewboard comments back onto JIRA > could be improved. I wrote the original script that does it - it's > some nasty procmail and python. > Hey Todd, I would like to work on this. Also Is it nasty procmail or nasty python ? I could make do with nasty python, but I have absolutly no idea about procmail :) > > It sounds like the FB folks are working on getting phabricator up - > maybe it will have better JIRA integration? > > Let me know if you have some time to spend on improving the > python/procmail setup with RB. I can connect you with the right infra > people to make the change. > > -Todd > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > We have been using review board for a while to conduct code review. > > One aspect I don't like the integration is that every round of review > would > > result in the summary and list of files (both of which could be long) to > be > > reposted to JIRA. > > For a large project, such as HBASE-2856 or HBASE-3777, it is impossible > > (without exaggeration) for a developer who didn't closely follow the > > development to understand what was going on. > > > > I want to share what I have been doing recently (by not commenting on > review > > board, if possible): > > I would quote the snippet of code in the patch and make my comment > > > > I think the person asking for review can post the url for review board > > request on the JIRA. By not filling Bugs field, we don't incur extra > > housekeeping that I mentioned earlier. > > If the Groups and People fields are filled properly, there is no risk of > > losing review request. In the worst case, one sentence on the JIRA can > > remind related people to look at the patch again. > > > > Note the above is just personally advice. Please don't interpret it as > rule > > or anything like that. > > > > Cheers > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
