Hi,
We're using the postreview extension and have been hitting that issue
pretty regularly. It's particularly annoying because I think that
reviewboard caches the diff so if you messed up, even if you push
afterwards and run hg postreview again it will still fail. I've finally
stumbled on the
Ah - yes, you have to use the -o option to tell ReviewBoard to figure
out the parent diff base by doing the equivalent of "hg outgoing". For
this to work you need to make sure that your default push repository is
the same as the one that ReviewBoard sees; if it isn't you can use -O
instead. ("h
I'm using Mercurial 3.0, ReviewBoard 2.0.1 and as of today, the latest code
from https://bitbucket.org/ccaughie/hgreviewboard . I did forget to add "hg
add file2.txt" to the list of steps, but I ran it during testing. Should
the code figure out which revision to use for the parent diff base? It
w
Following those instructions exactly I
get an error message of "The specified diff file is empty", which
is not surprising since file2.txt was never added to the
repository.
If I do "hg add file2.txt" before the first qnew on the other
hand, "hg postr
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Colin Caughie wrote:
> It is something I'd like to get to the bottom of though so if you have
any further information,
> e.g. what's going on in the particular diffs and parent diffs that cause
this issue, I'd be glad to take a look at it.
I've managed to recreat
I and my team are still using "hg postreview" daily, including after
upgrading to RB 2.0.1, and I'm still maintaining it as and when I have
time (although I admit I've fallen behind on some of the requests in the
issues list).
I haven't worked much with RBTools; I'm sure it works fine but what
We made a number of improvements to the Mercurial support in RBTools 0.6. I
don't have personal experience with hg subversion myself, so I don't know
whether it's still at all necessary for any workflows. Certainly, we'd
rather time be spent updating RBTools for any missing functionality.
Christia
Hi Bruce,
Most of the developers at my company are still using postreview with RB
2.0. We've always seen the error you reported in the bug, both with and
without postreview. It seems to be a reviewboard issue. As a workaround,
you might be able to make your parent diff include more changesets.
I'm investigating upgrading our installation to Review Board 2.x and one
issue I've come across is that with the existing code, "hg postreview"
doesn't work correctly. I've submitted a ticket to
https://bitbucket.org/ccaughie/hgreviewboard, but I was wondering - are
people still planning to use the
