--squash-history will work great for my team! Thanks Mark! On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 4:15:41 PM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote:
> Hi Chris, > > to quote Christian Hammond from a previous email > > We've hit a few issues like that with Mercurial, and it partly has to do > with how Mercurial represents file and revisions in their diffs. The > standard Mercurial diff format has a lot of issues that make it difficult > for us to extract meaningful revision history when generating a diff, > particularly when dealing with ranges, and while the Git-like format is a > bit better at this, it's not quite right either. > We've done some work in the past couple releases of Review Board and > RBTools to try to address this, at least for some cases. Can you verify > whether these scenarios are still happening for you on Review Board 4.0.6 > and RBTools 3? > If you're still able to reproduce these, we'll need RBTools debug logs, > the generated parent and main diffs, and some representation of the > Mercurial tree showing the revisions and relations at the point when those > logs were generated. > Our long-term goal is to bypass the Mercurial diff formats and go with our > DiffX format instead, which will give us greater control over how we're > able to represent revision information for each file. > > > As a workaround the multi commit feature can be turned off using rbt post: > -S, --squash-history > > Force the review request to be created without history, even if the server > supports it. Uploaded diffs will be squashed together. > > The default can be set in SQUASH_HISTORY > <https://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/2.0/rbt/configuration/repositories/#std:rbtconfig-SQUASH_HISTORY> > > in .reviewboardrc > <https://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/2.0/rbt/configuration/repositories/#rbtools-reviewboardrc> > . > > > > > *Mark Falconer* > *Software Development Team Lead* > > > > > Office : *+44 (0) 1224347070* <Aberdeen> > Mobile: *+44 (0) 7734 578 948* <+44%20(0)%207734%20578%20948> > Email: *[email protected]* > Web: *www.hrhgeology.com* <http://www.hrhgeology.com/> > > > > > > HRH Limited is a company registered in Scotland. Registration number: > SC117311. Registered office: 100 Union Street, Aberdeen, AB10 1QR, UK > > > Business Address: HRH Limited, 19 Silverburn Place, Bridge of Don, Aberdeen, > AB23 8EG, UK > > HRH Ltd accepts no liability for the content of this email, or for the > consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided, > unless that information is subsequently confirmed in writing. > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the > author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf > of Chris Hightower <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 16 May 2022 21:38 > *To:* Review Board Community <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Help with Mercurial and Post-Commit reviews > > Hello all! > > We're trying to swtich to ReviewBoard from JetBrains Upsource, and we're > attempting to do some post-commit reviews. > > The error we're seeing from rbt post happens during the 'validating > commits' stage, and it fails with Error Validating Diff > > You can replicate this with a mercurial repository via the following steps: > > Setup: > > - Create a new branch > - Change any file in the repository, and commit > - Add 2 new files (i.e. myfile1 and myfile2), hg add and hg commit > - Change the first new file and hg commit > - Change the 2nd new file and hg commit > - hg push --new-branch > > > Attempt to create a new review request with rbt post (the revision IDs > are: parent of first commit on this branch, and most recent commit on this > branch): > rbt post --branch `hg branch` -p --target-groups my-review-group --summary > "testing" --description "testing" --tracking-branch default f638ab41e9fc > 438b21c0ba39 > > We see the following output: > Validating commits... ███████████████████████████████████████ > [3/4] > ERROR: Error validating diff > > rb_test/myfile2.txt: The file was not found in the repository. (HTTP 400, > API Error 207) > > > What are we doing wrong? > > Our standard workflow is to create a new branch (for bugfix or new > feature), make code changes/additions/etc with commits along the way, push > the branch and then request a Review. Should we change our process? If so, > what is the best-practice for ReviewBoard? > > > Any help or insight you can provide would be greatly appreciated. > > -- > Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: > https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ > Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: > https://rbcommons.com/ > Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/ > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Review Board Community" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/4ddd2df2-6227-44b2-abd4-0278e7c661d4n%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/4ddd2df2-6227-44b2-abd4-0278e7c661d4n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Supercharge your Review Board with Power Pack: https://www.reviewboard.org/powerpack/ Want us to host Review Board for you? Check out RBCommons: https://rbcommons.com/ Happy user? Let us know! https://www.reviewboard.org/users/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Review Board Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard/e9fec7bc-15eb-4be8-950f-c1efe875b725n%40googlegroups.com.
