OK, that makes sense.
I was just hoping for a quicker solution to the "give me the whole file"
I'll see what I can provide in the realm of support for coding that ☺
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:reviewbo...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Christian Hammond
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: post-review login issue
We specifically avoid this for a few reasons.
1) It's much more efficient to store a diff in the database instead of a full
2) We need both an original, unmodified file along with the patched file. This
means that either we still need to do a server fetch, or we now need both files
uploaded and stored in the database.
3) It actually limits us. By having the diff, future extensions to Review Board
may be able to do things like track a patch's freshness (useful for contributed
patches to open source projects) by periodically attempting to apply the patch
to the latest version in a codebase. If we use full files, we can't build this
kind of extensibility.
4) Review Board now needs to know how to generate every kind of diff we could
possibly need for every revision control system when the user clicks Download
Diff. We want to preserve the diffs uploaded. For example, A Git diff may
contain some author and description information embedded in the diff. We can't
There's no reason today why we can't build the functionality to download the
modified files. It's just a matter of looking up the list of files associated
with a change and calling our existing function to grab the patched version of
the file from the repository, then assemble them into a zip or something for
Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com<mailto: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
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at