Re: Indexing works but search doesn't with PyLucene 2.9.3
Hi Chris, I've looked into Haystack a bit. I think it's a good thing to switch over to in a future release. Last I looked at it, it was still a little immature, but I'm sure it's improved since then. I can't say when it'd make a release of Review Board. Probably not 1.6, as that release is already looking more full than I'd like (going to have to split it up so we can get it out sooner) but maybe after, unless someone wants to tackle this project. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Chris Clark chris.cl...@ingres.comwrote: Christian Hammond wrote: Yeah, the 2.9.x (which is a pre-release for 3.0) is incompatible. The previous series before that should be compatible. We have a patch that provides 3.0 compatibility, but does not retain 2.x compatibility. I'll work at getting a version of this in for 1.5. It sounds like search will be PyLucene based for the next release? There was discussion on maybe using Haystacks http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard/msg/d55953719b904c43 I don't have a strong opinion on this (I don't us search otherwise I'd probably be working on this). If extra work is needed is it worth working on Haystack support instead? Based on the little I've seen Haystack shouldn't be that hard to pull in, i.e. could well be less work than fixing the native PyLucene support + it supports additional indexers which would make deployment/install easier too. Chris -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: post-review diff upload error on windows XP
So if upload is problem maybe this is permission error.
Look here:
http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/admin/sites/creating-sites/#changing-permissions.
Meybe this is problem Apache server doesn't have write access to
upload directory.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:01 AM, Chetan chetan@gmail.com wrote:
I have tried both 1 and 2. I am stuck in the second step. I have
checkedout the files made changes and then executed post-review...here
a new request gets created but fails to upload the diff. When i output
the diff to the console i can see the changes that are done. My
current problem is with attaching the diff to the review request. I
have tried manual upload as well as post-review. And both seems to
give the same error.
On Jul 26, 10:50 am, Jan Koprowski jan.koprow...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean we implement --revision-range for ClearCase and we use this
with full success. You probably use ReviewBoard in pre-review. We also
try to use it and we have problems too. But in our company all
checkins is saved in ClearQuest so we get them from ClearQuest using
CQPERL script and send to --revision-range of post-review. This works.
Before You look to review.reviewboard.org try do things:
1) Checkout file make change checking and checkout again - then try
run post-review this-file
2) Now make change (without checkin) and run post-review this-file
one more time
I mean - try very simple scenarios. I remember I try hard and this
work at least.
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Chetan chetan@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean i have to use --label option in postreview for generating
diff for clearcase?
I have tried adding diff file manual in GUI by using a sample file and
also using the output from postreview as an diff file. But there is
error stating Substring not found.
Have i misssed anything in the basic setup?
On Jul 20, 3:05 pm, Dan Savilonis d...@n-cube.org wrote:
The documentation and clearcase support in rbtools is rather outdated.
I believe Jan has an improvement so you don't need to use my cleartool
lsco hack among other things.
There are a large number of patches in the queue on
reviews.reviewboard.org but they don't appear to be going anywhere.
Nonetheless it would be better to start with these changes as a
baseline rather than debugging the existing broken code. Jan will need
to comment if he's interested in doing this. I can't do it easily
myself since RB doesn't upload full git patches right now...
Dan
On Jul 19, 8:06 am, Chetan chetan@gmail.com wrote:
Hello..
Do anyone have a hint on this issue? i have searched the forum but
could not find any solution.
On Jul 15, 11:44 am, Chetan chetan@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
I have facing problem in uploading the clearcase diff in review
request using post-review script.
command used: cleartool lsco -cview -me -recurse -short | sed
s//
\//g | xargs post-review -d --diff-only --target-people=chetan.d --
summary=test2_by_chetan --description test2_by_chetan --submit-
as=admin --server=http://.xxx.net/xxx/;
When i use -n option i get the diff on the prompt.
Error are as below:
HTTP POSTing
tohttp://172.24.1.107/reviewboard_lgsi/api/json/reviewrequests/16/draft...{'description':
'VIEW: chetan.d_sdaf_2_int\nVIEWTYPE: dynamic\ntest2_by_chetan'}
Uploading diff, size: 1017
HTTP POSTing
tohttp://172.24.1.107/reviewboard_lgsi/api/json/reviewrequests/16/diff/...{'basedir':
'M:/'}
Got API Error 105 (HTTP code 200): One or more fields had errors
Error data: {u'fields': {u'path': [u'substring not found']},
u'stat': u'fail', u'err': {u'msg': u'One or more fields had
errors', u'code': 105}}
Your review request still exists, but the diff is not attached.
Error uploading diff
The generated diff file was empty. This usually means no files were
modified in this change.
Try running with --output-diff and --debug for more information.
Request some help in getting this error fixed.
Thnks- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today
athttp://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group
athttp://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
--
Jan Koprowski- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--
Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at
http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/
Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: optimal configuration of RB with ClearCase
Yes Dan. Exactly! I'm 100% agree with You but I don't know how dynamic view works with UCM :| But there could be a problem with deleted files. Because there is option to delete it even from ClearCase history - from VOB. We must do it once and old reviews of this fill stop working. The bigger problem now is ClearCase doesn't recognize binary files and try to make diff also for dll, exe, lib and other files :| which is sad and painful for now. We made a little wrapper which check is file is not mark as compressed file by ClearCase and we don't consider this files. But there is a problem sometime. For example we have *.tcl file marked as compressed_file. Cause was NULL sign in revision 1 removed in revision 2 but all revisions was marked as compressed_file. We must delete this object from vob permanentyly and checkin only latest version one more time to allow this file go under review. On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Dan Savilonis d...@n-cube.org wrote: A dynamic view in Clearcase should be able to access any arbitrary file or revision associated with the VOB via the MVFS extended path notation. So, even if you use a path name that does not exist in your working copy due to your current config spec, you should still be able to access deletefile@@/branch/5, for example. You should be able to test this out directly at the command line. The dynamic view on the server is just a vehicle to access the Clearcase database. It doesn't matter at all what state it is in. If you think this isn't true, then we need to understand why and evaluate other options. Dan On Jul 22, 4:27 am, Igor xrevol...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 18, 7:25 pm, Jan Koprowski jan.koprow...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Igor xrevol...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have same ClearCase setup as described in patch of Jan Koprowski - http://reviews.reviewboard.org/r/1505/. Correct me if I wrong, in this patch each repository represents clearcase view of specific user (repository_url as defined in Jan's patch ) under /view/$user_$module_$branch. This /view/$user_$module_$branch model looks like misunderstanding. View for Review Board is another, different dynamic view distinct from others - central view where all branches of all users are present. You can get to files on this branches using extended path /path/to/file@@/main/branch/version. I don't understand why branches in Your model is different views - not standard ClearCase branch. OK. I need to fetch original file from central repository. What if file was removed from repository on some later stage? Do I need to save baseline of original file? BTW we use UCM ClearCase -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Jan Koprowski -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Three questions for using Review Board 1.0.6
Hi all. Please let me know what's going on with DVCS and Review Board. I know that there are ways to make it work (as we are in my organization), but it would be nice for it to be better integrated in the project with reviewing multiple changesets, etc. Thanks. On Jul 20, 5:40 pm, Andrew aschwa...@gmail.com wrote: I'm wondering if there has been any progress on theDVCSfront. I'd be very interested in the current design. Is one of the GSOC students actively working on this? On Jun 2, 6:08 pm, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: Hi James, Today, each logical change is meant to have its own review request. If you have three things that are related but are separately worked on, each should be put up for review separately. There's no notion of a review request that encompasses several different changes. I personally think this is good, as it keeps it organized and keeps things smaller. Where things may change over the next several months is how diffs are handled when used with aDVCSlike Git. In those cases, it makes sense to be able to have a review request for one change but with several iterative diffs leading up to that one change. It would still be one logical change, but with multiple diffs instead of one big diff. I don't know how well this concept would really apply in the SVN guess. I suspect it wouldn't. Now, I'm not fully sure I understand how your project is organized. Is each Java component in a different repository? If not, can't one diff be generated that has all the changes to all the components, and then put that up as one review request? If they are indeed in different repositories, then what you'd need is a way to have one review request that spans repositories. This is something that, for many reasons, we wouldn't be doing, so you'd have to have one review request per repository. I don't really understand your second request. It sounds like something that could be solved by aDVCSsolution, or multiple checkouts of your repository. For the third request, this is something that's not really on the radar for a release right now. In order to do it right, I think we need to do more than revision ranges (especially forDVCSsystems where it's not actually a numeric range). I'd like to do it correctly if we do it, and that will take some time and planning. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:41 AM, james tong james_tong...@yahoo.com.cnwrote: Hi, all, My team now is using the ReviewBoard-1.0.6 which is running on the Cent-OS server. And this is really fantastic software which help us a lot for code review. However, we also found some troubles when doing review. First, In our project, we need to update the code in more than one components (java project), so we may generate several diff files for one main function. And we find that it is impossible (or it is possible but we did not find that?) to upload these diff files in the same review request. Then we have to create several review requests for the same main function. So, I send this email and hope to know what is others' way for this problem? I think this may be a common case. Second, for some case, we may need to change the same class for two main functions at the same period (during the week by different team members), so how to generate diff file and create the review request for this case? (Our review request is created base on main function changes, and for this case, one review request will contain the changes for other main function, there may be some confusing). I know this might not be in the scope of this mail list, but still hope to get some useful suggestion. Third, we are using svn as the repository. And we want to know that when we can simply input the revision numbers in the web GUI for creating a review request without uploading the diff file. :-) Many Thanks BR// -- Best Regards! James.Tong 童熙 -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at
Re: Three questions for using Review Board 1.0.6
Eduardo, can you give a summary of what you're working on? Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Andrew aschwa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all. Please let me know what's going on with DVCS and Review Board. I know that there are ways to make it work (as we are in my organization), but it would be nice for it to be better integrated in the project with reviewing multiple changesets, etc. Thanks. On Jul 20, 5:40 pm, Andrew aschwa...@gmail.com wrote: I'm wondering if there has been any progress on theDVCSfront. I'd be very interested in the current design. Is one of the GSOC students actively working on this? On Jun 2, 6:08 pm, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: Hi James, Today, each logical change is meant to have its own review request. If you have three things that are related but are separately worked on, each should be put up for review separately. There's no notion of a review request that encompasses several different changes. I personally think this is good, as it keeps it organized and keeps things smaller. Where things may change over the next several months is how diffs are handled when used with aDVCSlike Git. In those cases, it makes sense to be able to have a review request for one change but with several iterative diffs leading up to that one change. It would still be one logical change, but with multiple diffs instead of one big diff. I don't know how well this concept would really apply in the SVN guess. I suspect it wouldn't. Now, I'm not fully sure I understand how your project is organized. Is each Java component in a different repository? If not, can't one diff be generated that has all the changes to all the components, and then put that up as one review request? If they are indeed in different repositories, then what you'd need is a way to have one review request that spans repositories. This is something that, for many reasons, we wouldn't be doing, so you'd have to have one review request per repository. I don't really understand your second request. It sounds like something that could be solved by aDVCSsolution, or multiple checkouts of your repository. For the third request, this is something that's not really on the radar for a release right now. In order to do it right, I think we need to do more than revision ranges (especially forDVCSsystems where it's not actually a numeric range). I'd like to do it correctly if we do it, and that will take some time and planning. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board -http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. -http://www.vmware.com On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:41 AM, james tong james_tong...@yahoo.com.cnwrote: Hi, all, My team now is using the ReviewBoard-1.0.6 which is running on the Cent-OS server. And this is really fantastic software which help us a lot for code review. However, we also found some troubles when doing review. First, In our project, we need to update the code in more than one components (java project), so we may generate several diff files for one main function. And we find that it is impossible (or it is possible but we did not find that?) to upload these diff files in the same review request. Then we have to create several review requests for the same main function. So, I send this email and hope to know what is others' way for this problem? I think this may be a common case. Second, for some case, we may need to change the same class for two main functions at the same period (during the week by different team members), so how to generate diff file and create the review request for this case? (Our review request is created base on main function changes, and for this case, one review request will contain the changes for other main function, there may be some confusing). I know this might not be in the scope of this mail list, but still hope to get some useful suggestion. Third, we are using svn as the repository. And we want to know that when we can simply input the revision numbers in the web GUI for creating a review request without uploading the diff file. :-) Many Thanks BR// -- Best Regards! James.Tong 童熙 -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know athttp://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com reviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: Git Patchsets (was [Re: Help on viewing diff])
I missed this e-mail completely, sorry about that. What I am implementing is Git patch series, that is formatted like a mailbox. It's pretty simple. You can read more about it here: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-format-patch.html Cheers, and sorry about the delay. Eduardo. On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: Eduardo's working on this for Summer of code. He can hopefully fill you in on the plans. Right now, there's no public code that I'm aware of. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Stephen Gallagher step...@gallagherhome.com wrote: On 06/24/2010 02:43 AM, Christian Hammond wrote: The way Review Board handles diffs today is that every revision of the diff is meant to be a single change, from the base to the tip of the branch. What I think you're wanting (please correct me if I'm wrong) is more of a patchset concept, with each diff being an iteration of a change. This workflow is not supported yet, but we have a Summer of Code student working on it. Is there a public specification available on how these patchsets are going to be supported? What about a public repository to follow the changes? This is highly relevant to my interests :) -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Issue 422 in reviewboard: Discard Review and Set Submitted should send email
Comment #5 on issue 422 by akshah123: Discard Review and Set Submitted should send email http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=422 It would be also great if it logged this action (submitted or discarded) as a history via comment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-iss...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en.
Re: Comment on Summer_of_Code_Ideas in reviewboard
Comment by brijendra.s.singh: It helps me to familiar with Python and, to a some extent, Django. Not sure how long this will go because of too many dependencies, if one of them is broken..not sure how this tool will survive good luck For more information: http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/Summer_of_Code_Ideas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-iss...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en.
