We had BRANCH = "master" in the .reviewboardrc, but no setting for TRACKING_BRANCH. The rbtools documentation says this:
--tracking-branch <https://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/dev/rbt/commands/post/#cmdoption-rbt-post--tracking-branch> Tracking branch from which your branch is derived (git only, defaults to origin/master) The default can be set in TRACKING_BRANCH in .reviewboardrc. So the default value for TRACKING_BRANCH should already be "origin/master". I will make that change anyway. The docs say this about BRANCH: --branch <https://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/dev/rbt/commands/post/#cmdoption-rbt-post--branch> Affected branch. The default can be set in BRANCH in .reviewboardrc. What exactly does "Affected branch" mean? Maybe we should not be setting this value to "master"? We are almost always working in some branch off of master, not in master directly. Shouldn't rbtools be able to determine the current git branch in the local environment? What is the default behavior if we do not specify BRANCH in the .reviewboardrc file? Thanks, Greg On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 3:27:01 PM UTC-4, Christian Hammond wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > Which version of RBTools are you guys using? > > Try setting the following in .reviewboardrc: > > TRACKING_BRANCH = ‘origin/master’ > > That will ensure that, by default, rbt post will base commits off of > origin/master. > > The important thing is making sure that developers are actually using your > central repo as origin, and not their own clone. If their clone is named > origin, you’ll get that sort of behavior, requiring they override by doing > —tracking-branch=<your_central_remote>/master. > > I’d have to see more about their individual repo setups and their tree of > commits to really say for sure what’s happening, but that’s a good starting > point for diagnosing what’s wrong. > > Christian > > -- > Christian Hammond - chri...@beanbaginc.com <javascript:> > Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org > Beanbag, Inc. - http://www.beanbaginc.com > > On August 12, 2014 at 10:54:40 AM, Greg Burcher (gregb...@gmail.com > <javascript:>) wrote: > > Having read the available documentation regarding using rbtools and git, I > am still trying to understand how git reviews are working with our git > branching strategy. Some things are not working as we expect. > > We have a primary git repository origin/master. We have created a clone > repository of master on the server where ReviewBoard is installed, and this > repository is refreshed at intervals. All dev work is done on local > branches off of master, and then merged back into master. We create a > branch for each user story or defect that we work on. So the typical work > pattern looks like this: > > 1. Dev creates a local branch off of master. > 2. Dev makes changes in their local branch and commits. > 3. Dev uses "rbt post" to create a review. > 4. When review is complete, dev pushes branch to origin then merges to > master. > > This pattern works fine. From reading the rbtools docs, my understanding > is that "rbt post" diffs my local committed branch workspace against the > copy of master on the clone with the ReviewBoard server. > > If, instead, the dev pushes their branch to origin and then uses "rbt > post" to create a review, rbtools says there are no diffs. It is as if > rbtools is comparing the local copy of the branch to the origin copy of the > branch, or the same pushed commit level on the clone copy of master on the > ReviewBoard server, even though this branch is not yet merged to master. > > Also, some devs have suggested that they have seen diffs where it seems > rbtools is comparing their local branch to their local copy of the master > branch. > > Can someone explain the behavior of rbtools relative to git branches in > the branch/work strategy that I have described here? > > I think we are doing pre-commit reviews, since our branch is never merged > to master when we create the reviews. Even if we have pushed our branch to > origin, rbtools should be comparing against master and not our branch, > right? So this is not post-commit. > > To sum it up, we always want rbtools to compare the local committed branch > workspace to origin/master, or a clone of master local to the ReviewBoard > server. > > Thanks, > Greg > -- > Get the Review Board Power Pack at http://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ > --- > Sign up for Review Board hosting at RBCommons: https://rbcommons.com/ > --- > Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "reviewboard" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to reviewboard...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- Get the Review Board Power Pack at http://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ --- Sign up for Review Board hosting at RBCommons: https://rbcommons.com/ --- Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "reviewboard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
