I don't see any reason why we shouldn't do this. Accountability is a good thing.


On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Paul Scott<psc...@vmware.com> wrote:
> Hmm... I don't know about that. I mean, if you really wanted to try and stick 
> unique identifiers in your p4 commands so you could track which ones were 
> currently pending, I guess you could, but I assume your Perforce 
> administrators would get cranky at you. ;) Also, I don't really know how 
> feasible that would be for showing progress... I mean, all you get from 
> monitor is what processes are still alive, and how long they've been running. 
> Maybe I misunderstood where you were going with that.
> The main purpose of throwing in a -zprog is just to make things a little 
> prettier on the Perforce side. It lets you identify your application to the 
> server, so logs and monitor output will display that instead of a generic 
> "p4" (for post-review) or whatever the p4 python api reports (for Review 
> Board). Mostly this is just a way of playing nice in the general Perforce 
> environment. Though this might also allow RB admins who also have access to 
> Perforce server logs to get a better sense of how they are affecting or being 
> affected by Perforce performance. (There may be other ways of identifying 
> Review Board in logs depending on your configuration--user, RB server 
> IP--though probably not for post-review).
> This wouldn't be a huge change (just tack that on to p4 commands, and set 
> something in the p4python connection object) and I would think the only major 
> reason not to do it is if people didn't really want Review Board reported as 
> reviewboard or similar in their Perforce logs.
> -- Paul
> ________________________________________
> From: reviewboard@googlegroups.com [reviewbo...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of Christian Hammond [chip...@chipx86.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:32 PM
> To: reviewboard@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: Report application name to Perforce using -zprog?
> So this would allow for reporting progress on, say, file fetches from 
> Perforce? Something like that would be interesting for displaying progresses 
> on rendering diffs, but would be a lot of work. We'd need to find a good use 
> case for it and implement things in a way where our code could take advantage 
> of this information without requiring (for all the other SCMs).
> Christian
> --
> Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com<mailto:chip...@chipx86.com>
> Review Board - http://www.review-board.org
> VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Paul Scott 
> <psc...@vmware.com<mailto:psc...@vmware.com>> wrote:
> Hey Review Boarders,
> My team uses the -zprog global option with a few major internal 
> scripts/applications to help better track usage patterns. (If you're 
> unfamiliar with -zprog, you can read about it here: 
> http://kb.perforce.com/AdminTasks/SuperuserTasks/UsingTheZpro..erProcesses). 
> I was thinking about adding this to our Review Board and post-review. 
> How/where I implement this will be a little bit different based on whether 
> this is a customization or something I intend to submit as a patch, so I 
> wanted to see if this is something folks would like Review Board to do, or 
> not like Review Board to do, or what.
> Thanks,
> Paul Scott
> >

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