Jay wrote:
On Sep 21, 12:11 pm, Chris Clark <chris.cl...@ingres.com> wrote:
It looks like p4 is claiming there is a perforce repo in the svn
location. A quick "hack"/test would be to modify postreview to check svn
first. I.e. hack the SCMCLIENTS def.
Let's assume this suggestion actually works since it looks like the
script first tries hg, then p4, probably then svn.  It seems there
needs to be a way to explicitly indicate which scm provider to use,
rather than do it implicitly since it's conceivable they could all
work for a given directory.

Not really, it isn't good practice (IMHO) to use multiple SCMs in the same working directory. You may have a mix of SCM's under a given tree but not in the same directory.

   Take for instance the following

c:/dev   - this is the root for the perforce clientspec
c:/dev/myproject/vers1 - this is a perforce version of the project
called out in the clientspec
c:/dev/myproject/vers2 - this is the root for an svn repository for
the project

I could see how perforce might be picked up for myproject/vers2 even
though it isn't specified in the perforce clientspec.  If there was a
way to explicitly declare the repo type, then this wouldn't be an

The way to do this would be to edit postreview.py either by adding some sort of directive as I think you are suggesting or by customizing for your site/usage.

If it were me, I'd edit the SCMCLIENTS list definition (I've actually done this for our site, I have customization for VMS so svn isn't checked as VMS command spawning is not implemented in CPython or Jython). See http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/codebase/dev/getting-started/ under RBTools if you want to start with headrevs from git.

E.g. I have something like:

### re-define SCMCLIENTS, this makes merging changes easier (than customizing SCMCLIENTS) :-)


Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at 
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to