Re: post-review and Windows users
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 22:53, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: We would love this too, and we're hoping to get some student proposals from Summer of Code that would begin adding better integration on Windows (namely in IDEs, but some of this would likely require better hooks for post-review in Windows). In my opinion, the first Windows integration work should be integration with Explorer: it is ubiquitous, so it is the best bang for buck. It's possible that now, with post-review existing inside the rbtools package, we could add a flag for graphical output that would, using some standard toolkit, notify people of errors or successes, and then when installed on Windows it would register entries for hooking post-review up to the context menu. It probably wouldn't be a ton of work. The advantage of this is that it keeps the code in the same place, and it's possible to generate setup.exe files for a Python package. Sure. Having post-review packaged separately is certainly a step in the right direction. If you could file a feature request for this, it will help us track it. http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=998 Cheers. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com 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 and Windows users
David, It is pretty simple to add a context menu item that will launch a command. The attached registry file will add a right-click menu item for folders in windows explorer that will launch a command window and run post-review selected folder. This obviously has several limitations as it is just for folders and is only useful for creating new reviews, not updating existing ones. I have to say this is not something I've used, just something that came to mind when I saw your post. The attached registry file is written on the assumption that post-review is in the path. -Manny On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM, David Allouche david.allou...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 22:53, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.com wrote: We would love this too, and we're hoping to get some student proposals from Summer of Code that would begin adding better integration on Windows (namely in IDEs, but some of this would likely require better hooks for post-review in Windows). In my opinion, the first Windows integration work should be integration with Explorer: it is ubiquitous, so it is the best bang for buck. It's possible that now, with post-review existing inside the rbtools package, we could add a flag for graphical output that would, using some standard toolkit, notify people of errors or successes, and then when installed on Windows it would register entries for hooking post-review up to the context menu. It probably wouldn't be a ton of work. The advantage of this is that it keeps the code in the same place, and it's possible to generate setup.exe files for a Python package. Sure. Having post-review packaged separately is certainly a step in the right direction. If you could file a feature request for this, it will help us track it. http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=998 Cheers. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- pr.reg Description: Binary data
Re: post-review and Windows users
We would love this too, and we're hoping to get some student proposals from Summer of Code that would begin adding better integration on Windows (namely in IDEs, but some of this would likely require better hooks for post-review in Windows). David Trowbridge and myself (the main developers on the project) are pretty much Linux guys and are quite busy as it is with Review Board and work, so we heavily rely on outside contributions. A graphical application wrapping post-review would be great, but someone else would likely have to write it. It's possible that now, with post-review existing inside the rbtools package, we could add a flag for graphical output that would, using some standard toolkit, notify people of errors or successes, and then when installed on Windows it would register entries for hooking post-review up to the context menu. It probably wouldn't be a ton of work. The advantage of this is that it keeps the code in the same place, and it's possible to generate setup.exe files for a Python package. If you could file a feature request for this, it will help us track it. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.review-board.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:34 AM, David Allouche david.allou...@gmail.comwrote: Something which appears frequently here is you should really be using post-review. At the moment, this is a bad answer, because there is no usable Windows GUI that does post-review. First, let me give you some of my background. I am Linux-Emacs-Python-Bazaar kind of programmer. I worked for several years as a programmer on http://launchpad.net/, and before that I worked on http://texmacs.org/. For the last year I have been working in an investment bank, in a team where the standard development environment is Windows-Visual-C++-TortoiseSVN. Note that I say TortoiseSVN: most of folks involved in writing code are actually mathematicians, they do not consider themselves as programmers (they're wrong), but getting them to use command-line Subversion is out of the question. First because command.com sucks, but also because they are just not interested in this kind of arcana. Now, I introduced ReviewBoard there because doing code reviews by mailing around unified diffs, as I used to do it on Launchpad, was just unnecessary distracting pain to my Windows-using collaborators. In this context, they easiest and least distracting way I found for them submit reviews was to show them the specific recipe required for TortoiseSVN to generate diffs that contain paths that reviewboard can process (the naive approach produces a diff with absolute filesystem paths, gah!). I would love to be able to tell them: Here's a setup.exe, after you install it, you will have new contextual menu entry in explorer that allows up to submit a new review or upload a new diff to an existing review. But until there is something close to that, they will still use TortoiseSVN to generate a diff. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard@googlegroups.com 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
