On 2012-12-04 04:54, Christian Hammond wrote:
In time, we'll have "rb post" or similar, which will be a better post-review.

I have already written such a thing (wrapping post-review)...

Mine is probably rather specific to our specific work flow, so I'm not sure it would help you. I'm curious, though; what would you envision that such a command would do differently from post-review?

For the sake of interest...

Our current feature set:
- Get name of branch being posted (resolve things like 'HEAD', raw SHA's, etc.).
- Make sure branch is pushed to remote.
- Append git log since merge base to the diff (allows reviewing the commit messages also).

The first, and determining the merge base, are probably required for any reasonable implementation, but the latter two I could imagine would be specific to our usage. (OTOH, if you think they're interesting, I could see about sharing our script...)

Our planned feature set:
- Tag the branch with the request ID so it can be updated later.
- (Optional) Open user's browser to complete request.

(And yes, I know post-review already does the browser thing. I'm not sure if I can use it directly, however, as the other planned feature depends on parsing the browser-not-opened output to get the request ID.

Right now, there is a -r option to specify updating a specific request. The idea with recording the ID is to automatically update the old request when re-posting the same branch.

We would also like to record the SHA that was posted (mostly to be able to verify when doing a merge that the branch hasn't changed) as well as the name of the branch that was posted, but this needs server-side changes of course.


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