On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 02:11:08PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:29 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> > Patchwork:
> > patch arrives: nothing
> > mark self as reviewer: use web interface
> > send review: reply, find patch in Patchwork, mark status
> > send fixed patch: sen
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
> but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to
> know
> which patc
On 02/20/2014 10:32 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussi
On 20.2.2014 20:08, Martin Kosek wrote:
But I think a simple script like "startreview.py some.patch" that Petr
mentioned is a good start, few lines of code.
I have modified my push.py to start_review.py.
Clone
https://github.com/spacekpe/freeipa-processes.git
and read the commit message :-)
I
On (20/02/14 15:09), Martin Kosek wrote:
>On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
>> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
>
On 02/20/2014 04:41 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 16:34, Petr Viktorin wrote:
...
Note that Trac has XMLRPC so it is very very easy to have script for review
assignment etc.
$ start_review.py somerandomstring.patch
can very easily grep ticket URL and add your name to 'Reviewer' field in t
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:29 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Patchwork:
> patch arrives: nothing
> mark self as reviewer: use web interface
> send review: reply, find patch in Patchwork, mark status
> send fixed patch: send the mail, find patch in Patchwork, mark
> status,
> find old patch in
On 02/20/2014 05:29 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:55 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
...
Mail+Trac:
patch arrives: tag message TODO when it comes in (1 keystroke)
mark self as reviewer: use web interface (or API)
send review: just
On 02/20/2014 08:15 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we intro
On 02/20/2014 04:55 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:43 +0100, Tomas Babej wrote:
> > No. The only thing that happened automatically in Patchwork was that
> > entries got created. Patchwork doesn't even have threads - each
> > version of a patch needed to be individually marked as superseded.
> > Very much mindless clicking
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, J
On 02/20/2014 04:34 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wr
On 20.2.2014 16:34, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 2
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 0
On 02/20/2014 04:15 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:15:23AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> > >> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, Feb 20,
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:13 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01
On 02/20/2014 04:09 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:59 +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
> >>> rev
On 02/20/2014 03:52 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:22:56PM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
> >We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
> >which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
> >but that is a post-review t
On 02/20/2014 02:54 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced
On 20.2.2014 14:47, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a pos
On 20.2.2014 14:31, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone
On 02/20/2014 02:31 PM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is not useful
On 20.2.2014 13:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are alrea
On 02/20/2014 02:02 PM, Petr Spacek wrote:
> On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commi
On 20.2.2014 13:31, Sumit Bose wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not
On 02/20/2014 01:36 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is not us
On 02/20/2014 01:22 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
>> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is
>> reviewing
>> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit
>> message,
>> but that is a post-review tag which is
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:14:50PM +0100, Martin Kosek wrote:
> We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
> which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
> but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to
>
On 02/20/2014 01:14 PM, Martin Kosek wrote:
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are a
We had a discussion with other developers how better track who is reviewing
which patch. Recently, we introduced the Reviewed-By tag in a commit message,
but that is a post-review tag which is not useful for someone who wants to know
which patches are already reviewed and which are not reviewed.
W
35 matches
Mail list logo
