I'd rather not make it based on the VCS, because that just means two things
to document and adds to confusion. We'd have to tell people which to click
with examples of VCSs for each one, and that's a pain. If we renamed it in
the UI, it'd be global.

I'm actually leaning toward "Committed" just because "Submitted" has
confused some people in the past, where they thought that meant they've
submitted the review request. However, "Committed" is very strongly a VCS
term, and if we ended up in the future supporting more models than just
stuff from VCSs, it'd be wrong. We're not there yet, though, but it's
something to consider.

Sorry if the new UI caused any problems for your engineers. This was a
change we've wanted to make for a long time, before our 1.0 release. I don't
anticipate any more major changes before 1.0. We may want to revisit some
things post-1.0 (especially for extensions), and may make changes then, but
that's to be determined.


Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
VMware, Inc.

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Jeff Andros <j...@bigredtj.com> wrote:

> Christian Hammond wrote:
> <snip>
> > I agree that Commit is more standard. We can make this change in the
> > public UI, but the API and database will have to remain Submitted. I'm
> > not loving the inconsistency there, but there's not a great solution
> > to that.
> </snip>
> How much work would it be to make the UI dynamic... change the wording
> for submit/commit/whatever depending on which VCS you're working with?
> It's pretty low priority, but here at Pillar we use Perforce, and my
> team is already a little antsy about the UI changing at all.
> --Jeff
> >

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"reviewboard" group.
To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to