Re: Help with Mercurial and Post-Commit reviews
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 Mobile: +44 (0) 7734 578 948 Email: mark.falco...@hrhgeology.com Web: 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: reviewboard@googlegroups.com on behalf of Chris Hightower Sent: 16 May 2022 21:38 To: Review Board Community 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 reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. 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_source=footer>. --
RBTools Ticket #4954: rbtools 2.0 does not read .reviewboardrc with encoding UTF8-BOM
--
To reply, visit https://hellosplat.com/s/beanbag/tickets/4954/
--
New ticket #4954 by mark.falconer
For Beanbag, Inc. > RBTools
Status: New
Tags: Priority:Medium, Type:Defect
--
rbtools 2.0 does not read .reviewboardrc with encoding UTF8-BOM
==
# What version are you running?
RBTools 2.0.1 (Python 3.8.10)
# What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. On Windows, add a .reviewboardrc to a repository using notepad.
2. run rbt post to post a diff
# What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
Expected: The diff is posted
Actual: The diff fails
# What operating system are you using?
Win10
# Attach the debug out from the command.
```
$ rbt post --debug
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\utils\filesystem.py",
line 220, in parse_config_file
config = _load_python_file(filename, config)
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\utils\filesystem.py",
line 52, in _load_python_file
exec(compile(f.read(), filename, 'exec'), config)
File "D:\Workspace\DataNG Documents.reviewboardrc", line 1
REVIEWBOARD_URL = 'http://dev-revbrd01.hrh.local/'
^
SyntaxError: invalid character in identifier
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Program Files\RBTools\bin..\Python\Scripts\rbt-script.py", line 33,
in
sys.exit(load_entry_point('RBTools==2.0.1', 'console_scripts', 'rbt')())
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\commands\main.py",
line 124, in main
command.run_from_argv([RB_MAIN, command_name] + args)
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\commands__init__.py",
line 744, in run_from_argv
parser = self.create_arg_parser(argv)
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\commands__init__.py",
line 731, in create_arg_parser
self.config = load_config()
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\utils\filesystem.py",
line 250, in load_config
parsed_config = parse_config_file(filename)
File "C:\Program
Files\RBTools\Python\lib\site-packages\rbtools-2.0.1-py3.8.egg\rbtools\utils\filesystem.py",
line 222, in parse_config_file
raise Exception('Syntax error in config file: %s\n'
Exception: Syntax error in config file: D:\Workspace\DataNG
Documents.reviewboardrc
Line 1 offset 18
```
# Please provide any additional information below.
Notepad creates files with encoding UTF8-BOM. Changing the encoding to remove
the BOM works. Creating the file using rbt works.
I am raising this for 2 reasons:
1. The documentation states that .reviewboardrc should be a valid python file.
Running ` "C:\Program Files\RBTools\Python\python" .reviewboardrc` completes
successfully (i.e. does nothing, but no errors), indicating that it is.
2. RBTools versions before 2.0 worked successfully.
I think the config file should be read with encoding `utf-8-sig`
https://www.howtosolutions.net/2019/04/python-fixing-unexpected-utf-8-bom-error-when-loading-json-data/
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"reviewboard-issues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/reviewboard-issues/20220106084624.4918.43381%40ip-10-1-54-209.ec2.internal.
Feature Request: Review markdown docs in repositories
Hi, we have used Reviewboard for several years and I recommend it to every developer group I speak to. Recently there is lots of activity storing Markdown documents in repositories. GitHub and GitLab create a Readme.md file, and the GitLab wiki (based on https://github.com/gollum/gollum/wiki) stored the wiki pages in a git repository. A lot of Microsofts documentation has also moved to markdown stored on github (e.g. https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/azure-docs/) As far as I can tell Reviewboard lets you review markdown documents that you attach to a review request, but does not allow you to review (with markdown preview) documents that are in the diff itself. I think this would be really useful as we could move all of our user documentation into a repository for versioning and use rbtools to generate a review request for the documentation. If I am missing existing capability please let me know! Thanks and regards, Mark -- 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 reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
