We won't support Review Board running on IronPython. That's a no-go.
However, a utility program for communicating with the server could be
written using IronPython (or whatever) and Review Board can execute that,
much like we do with git and p4.

Christian

-- 
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.review-board.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com


On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:14 PM, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Any chance Review-Board will work with IronPython?  (yes, the Vault
> libraries are .NET)
>
>
>
> On Aug 18, 11:01 am, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Christian,
> >
> > It does, but requires a login first.  It has a SOAP interface defined,
> > but SourceGear highly recommends NOT using it.
> >
> > I have a Python question for you (sorry, until a couple weeks ago I
> > never even heard of Python ;-)
> >
> > It seems the (time-wise) expensive steps in this Vault integration are
> > the Java VM for the Java client, and the login step each time the CLC
> > is called.  I'm thinking that creating some form of a DLL interface
> > that will stay logged into Vault would greatly improve our response
> > times.  Does Python have support for DLL integration?  COM?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Aug 17, 1:23 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi John,
> >
> > > Yeah, that seems a bit expensive, slow, and unscalable...
> >
> > > Does Vault happen to have built-in support for looking at raw files
> from a
> > > web page, given a filename and revision? If so, it can take advantage
> of the
> > > new raw URL field I'm adding for Git.
> >
> > > If not, we'll need to figure out a solution that doesn't require Java.
> >
> > > Christian
> >
> > > --
> > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > Review Board -http://www.review-board.org
> > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
> > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:31 AM, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Thanks Christian, that seemed to be the case.
> >
> > > > Just a note to anyone attempting to integrate with Sourcegear's
> Vault:
> > > > I originally attempted to use their Java CLC for portability, but
> each
> > > > file in the review needed to contact the Vault server twice and each
> > > > contact would (re)spawn the Java VM which was very expensive time
> > > > wise.  I'm currently testing the system with the Win32 CLC and it is
> > > > slow, but usable.  I'm considering looking into the possiblity of
> > > > batching the contacts to the Vault server...time permitting.
> >
> > > > Thanks again for all your help Christian!!
> > > > John
> >
> > > > On Aug 12, 7:21 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> >
> > > > > It's possible that when you use the cache function, it's returning
> > > > > cached data from some older, broken attempt. If you reenable the
> > > > > caching and then fully clear the cache and try again, does it work?
> >
> > > > > Christian
> >
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 12, 2009, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > More:
> >
> > > > > > I traced the source of that parameter to get_original_file() in
> > > > > > diffutils.py.  When I bypass the cache lookup and just return the
> > > > > > result of the fetch_file() sub-function I can display diffs
> properly,
> > > > > > although response is very slow as expected.  Any ideas where I
> should
> > > > > > look to determine why the cache contents would be wrong?  (I do
> have
> > > > > > the memcached server installed)
> >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> >
> > > > > > On Aug 12, 5:54 pm, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> I think I am very close now, but I have a problem in
> diffutils.py.
> > > > > >> The second parameter in the parse() function (file I believe)
> contains
> > > > > >> some invalid data, where does this get populated?
> >
> > > > > >> Thanks!
> >
> > > > > >> On Aug 11, 2:29 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> > Hi,
> >
> > > > > >> > Path is the path to the file in the repository. If the path in
> the
> > > > diff is
> > > > > >> > always going to be absolute, then you can completely ignore
> > > > base_path and
> > > > > >> > just use path. We use base_path for Subversion, where the
> filenames
> > > > in the
> > > > > >> > diff are relative to the current directory rather than the
> root of
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > repository. We then append path to base_path to generate that
> > > > absolute path.
> >
> > > > > >> > Christian
> >
> > > > > >> > --
> > > > > >> > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > > >> > Review Board -http://www.review-board.org
> > > > > >> > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
> > > > > >> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:54 AM, schuijo <schu...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > >> > > Christian,
> >
> > > > > >> > > Ok...I think I've severely bitten off more than I can chew,
> but
> > > > I'm
> > > > > >> > > trying to forge my way through this.  I've been modifying
> > > > post-review
> > > > > >> > > to add Vault support, and appear to have it working to the
> point
> > > > where
> > > > > >> > > it seems to be attempting to contact the Vault server while
> > > > uploading
> > > > > >> > > the diff.  The point I'm a little lost/confused on is how to
> > > > represent
> > > > > >> > > Vault in the RepositoryInfo class.  What exactly are path
> and
> > > > > >> > > base_path and how are they used?  (hopefully this will help
> me to
> > > > > >> > > determine what need to be populated in there for Vault)
> >
> > > > > >> > > Thanks!
> >
> > > > > >> > > On Jul 28, 4:05 pm, Christian Hammond <chip...@chipx86.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > > There are some threads on the mailing list about doing
> this, but
> > > > they're
> > > > > >> > > not
> > > > > >> > > > exactly step-by-step tutorials. The best reference right
> now is
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > > > scmtools/*.py files.
> >
> > > > > >> > > > Basically, you'll create a subclass of SCMTool that does
> the
> > > > following:
> >
> > > > > >> > > > 1) Grabs a file from a repository, given a file path and
> > > > revision.
> > > > > >> > > > 2) Provide a DiffParser subclass that handles pulling out
> > > > filenames and
> > > > > >> > > > revisions and any other necessary data from a diff (most
> of the
> > > > code for
> > > > > >> > > all
> > > > > >> > > > this is common, so you just hook into things -- see the
> other
> > > > files for
> > > > > >> > > > examples).
> > > > > >> > > > 3) If Vault has a concept of server-side changesets (you
> > > > register a
> > > > > >> > > > changeset with a description, and other data, and the
> server
> > > > always knows
> > > > > >> > > > what you have checked out on the client) then you'll need
> to
> > > > implement
> > > > > >> > > > get_changeset().
> >
> > > > > >> > > > So the general model is that this code will have three
> classes:
> >
> > > > > >> > > > 1) VaultTool
> > > > > >> > > > 2) VaultDiffParser
> > > > > >> > > > 3) VaultClient
> >
> > > > > >> > > > VaultTool will be a subclass of SCMTool and will be what
> Review
> > > > Board
> > > > > >> > > talks
> > > > > >> > > > to.
> >
> > > > > >> > > > VaultDiffParser will be a subclass of DiffParser and will
> > > > override
> > > > > >> > > functions
> > > > > >> > > > to parse revision info out of a diff.
> >
> > > > > >> > > > VaultClient will be a wrapper around the command line
> tool,
> > > > which
> > > > > >> > > > VaultClient will talk to.
> >
> > > > > >> > > > Now, let's talk diffs. Many revision control systems
> provide
> > > > tools that
> > > > > >> > > > generate diffs unsuitable for Review Board, and sometimes
> we
> > > > have to work
> > > > > >> > > > around them. If vault's tool generates a diff containing
> > > > revision
> > > > > >> > > > information for a file that can be used to pull data from
> the
> > > > repository,
> > > > > >> > > > then we're good. If not, you'll need to implement this in
> > > > post-review.
> >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com
> > > > > Review Board -http://www.review-board.org
> > > > > VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to