On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:03, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:41, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: >>> On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:32:19 -0700 >>> Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: >>>> I would like to recommend that the Python core developers start using >>>> a code review tool such as Rietveld or Reviewboard. I don't really >>>> care which tool we use (I'm sure there are plenty of pros and cons to >>>> each) but I do think we should get out of the stone age and start >>>> using a tool for the majority of our code reviews. >>> >>> He, several of us would like it too (although for short patches it >>> doesn't really make a difference), but what's missing is some kind of >>> Roundup integration. Something as trivial as a "start review" button in >>> front of every uploaded patch file would do the trick; it has been >>> suggested several times already, but what's needed is someone to write >>> the code :) >> >> The other option (as discussed on Buzz) is to add Rietveld's upload.py >> to Misc/ > > A problem with that is that we regularly make matching improvements to > upload.py and the server-side code it talks to. While we tend to be > conservative in these changes (because we don't control what version > of upload.py people use) it would be a pain to maintain backwards > compatibility with a version that was distributed in Misc/ two years > ago -- that's kind of outside our horizon.
Well, I would assume people are working from a checkout. Patches from an outdated checkout simply would fail and that's fine by me. > > Maybe the upload.py script distributed could just download the most > current version from codereview.appspot.com/static/upload.py -- that > URL is easy enough to keep stable. That's fine by me. > >> and tell people to use that to submit the patch. Then we >> simply say to the person submitting the patch, "upload it to Rietveld >> and paste in the link" or simply require it upfront to encourage >> people to do the upload in the first place. This would let usage to >> move forward until we get that "start review" button (wasn't Ezio >> looking into it?). > > Yeah, but it would still not work if they are working in an unpacked > tarball -- upload.py requires that you have a VCS checkout of some > sort (though it supports SVN, Hg, Git and Bzr). How often do we even get patches generated from a downloaded copy of Python? Is it enough to need to worry about this? _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
