Oh sorry indeed i overview the review approach section. The table is nice, thanks Dan !
28 janv. 2023 09:37:50 Daniel Watford <d...@foomoo.co.uk>: > Hi Gil, > > I don't think a checklist is quite enough, assuming we want to track the > status of each file reviewed. > > From the review approach section: > > > - If in the reviewers opinion a file change will not change OFBiz > behaviour in any way they should mark the corresponding entry in the table > below as PASSED. > - If the reviewer identifies an issue with a changed file, then they > should add a comment in the PR on GitHub AND mark the corresponding entry > in the table below as WORK NEEDED. > - If the reviewer is unsure how to classify a changed file they should > mark the corresponding entry in the table below as UNSURE. > - In each of the above cases, the reviewer should add their name against > the entry in the table below. > > The checklist doesn't give us the opportunity to see what files need some > additional help. > > I'm sure there must be some way of getting Confluence to produce a table > from a list - I just don't seem to have found it yet! I'll play around with > Confluence a bit more. > > But as mentioned before, perhaps I am making too much out of tracking this > review. > > Thanks, > > Dan. > > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 17:05, gil.portenseigne <gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> > wrote: > >> I got to leave, but i generated in confluence a list of check, is that >> good enough ? >> >> Gil >> On 27/01/23 05:41, gil.portenseigne wrote: >>> Hello, indeed, that will generate much spam, i did some before reading >>> your answer. >>> >>> I'll have a look for conluence. >>> >>> Gil >>> >>> >>> On 27/01/23 04:14, Daniel Watford wrote: >>>> Hi Gill and Jacques, >>>> >>>> I don't think we should add comments to the PR to track the files that >> we >>>> have reviewed as I think each comment will appear separately in the >> PR's >>>> conversation view. >>>> >>>> However, with such a large PR where we hope to get several reviewers >>>> involved I think we do need a mechanism to track reviewed files. >>>> >>>> I created a page here - Codenarc integration review tracker - OFBiz >> Project >>>> Open Wiki - Apache Software Foundation >>>> < >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Codenarc+integration+review+tracker >>> >>>> - >>>> suggesting an approach. >>>> >>>> If the approach is acceptable then all reviewers should be able to >> update >>>> the page as we go. >>>> >>>> I'm stuck with finding a nice way to generate a table listing all the >>>> changed files and the review status of each file. I have included the >>>> commands to produce the list of files and shown some examples of how >> to add >>>> a header, but my attempts to turn that into something useful on a >>>> confluence page have not been fruitful. >>>> >>>> So two questions. >>>> - Is it worth coming up with a page/table to track this PR or am I just >>>> creating unnecessary admin work when we could use comments in the PR? >>>> - Can anyone create a table in Confluence that we could use to track >> the >>>> review effort? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Dan. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 15:27, gil.portenseigne < >> gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Oops, i did a fixup commit with push force that remove all comments >> in >>>>> the pull request... Will not do that again. >>>>> >>>>> I fixed the detected typo. >>>>> >>>>> gil >>>>> On 27/01/23 02:56, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> … >> the pull >>>>>> … >> checkbox if a >>>>>> … >> request, >>>>>> … >> to the >>>>> same conclusion. >>>>>> … >> Could >>>>> be easy if it's the same unique words in every file. >>>>>> … >> concern >>>>> one >>>>>> … >> but it >>>>>> … >> file, to >>>>> let >>>>>> … >> "Review >>>>> changes" button allows you to comment, approve or request changes on >> this >>>>> file. >>>>>> … >> can >>>>> mark an >>>>>> … >> reviewers >>>>> can skip >>>>>> … >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Daniel Watford >> >> >> > > -- > Daniel Watford
