Re: Some noob questions...
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Klaim - Joël Lamotte mjkl...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.comwrote: Hi Joel, The command line isn't the only way, but we recommend it over the web interface. The reason is that not all diff generators provide enough information to be able to look up files remotely. RBTools/post-review will ensure the diffs contain the necessary information, and may also provide additional useful metadata or work around quirks. It's also just faster to type 'post-review' than to generate a diff and upload it through a website. Ok but it is not clear to me if you mean command line on the same computer where Review Board server is installed, or if there is some kind of associated command line client, DSVC tools? Joel Lamotte This is on the end users' machines. We have a set of command line tools (well, one right now, but soon a set) under the name RBTools, which is installed on the develoeprs' machines. These interact with the Review Board server, and they also call out to git, svn, or whatever command line tools are appropriate to interact with your local checkout. The main tool we have right now is called post-review. There are docs on it at http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/users/tools/post-review/ A new release will be out in a couple weeks that provides some new command line tools for working with a Review Board server, and a Python API that can be used to write custom clients to talk to Review Board. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com -- 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: Some noob questions...
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.comwrote: Hi Joel, The command line isn't the only way, but we recommend it over the web interface. The reason is that not all diff generators provide enough information to be able to look up files remotely. RBTools/post-review will ensure the diffs contain the necessary information, and may also provide additional useful metadata or work around quirks. It's also just faster to type 'post-review' than to generate a diff and upload it through a website. Ok but it is not clear to me if you mean command line on the same computer where Review Board server is installed, or if there is some kind of associated command line client, DSVC tools? Joel Lamotte -- 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: Some noob questions...
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Christian Hammond chip...@chipx86.comwrote: This is on the end users' machines. We have a set of command line tools (well, one right now, but soon a set) under the name RBTools, which is installed on the develoeprs' machines. These interact with the Review Board server, and they also call out to git, svn, or whatever command line tools are appropriate to interact with your local checkout. The main tool we have right now is called post-review. There are docs on it at http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/users/tools/post-review/ A new release will be out in a couple weeks that provides some new command line tools for working with a Review Board server, and a Python API that can be used to write custom clients to talk to Review Board. Thanks for the info. I think I'll wait for the next release before installing all this, it's not urgent. Joel Lamotte -- 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
Some noob questions...
Hi, I am considering using this tool but I have some questions to clarify ReviewBoard usage. Before the questions, just a quick note: the website states Stable: 1.7.1http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/releasenotes/dev/reviewboard/1.7.1/ In-development: 1.7 RC 1http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/releasenotes/dev/reviewboard/1.7-rc-1/ Which is not very logical and don't really feel professional either... :) 0. The context I would use this is: - I'm working alone for now - I have some friends who can help by reviewing the code - until now I just gave them access to the source code but it's not perfect to do reviews In this context, is there some specific feature you think would appeal to me in ReviewBoard? 1. Can I use Mercurial and Git with 1.7.1? It is not clear from the documentation, I just see some discussions implying I can, but I didn't find explicit statements. 2. I'm using Rhodecode to manage my repositories. It have basic review support apparently. How does ReviewBoard compare? 3. How does ReviewBoard compare to Phabricator's review system and Atlassian's one? So far I have a hard time seeing any real difference other than the cost. The problem is that I didn't use any such tool so far so I don't know what kind of feature are good or not. Thanks for your time Joel Lamotte -- 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: Some noob questions...
On 2012-12-28 10:20, Klaim J. Lamotte wrote: 0. The context I would use this is: - I'm working alone for now - I have some friends who can help by reviewing the code - until now I just gave them access to the source code but it's not perfect to do reviews In this context, is there some specific feature you think would appeal to me in ReviewBoard? I think that would depend mainly on the degree of informality of your review process. If we're talking 'running commentary while looking over your shoulder', you probably don't need RB yet. If you want to keep a record of reviews, or even just have a structured mechanism for doing reviews, then RB will provide this. 1. Can I use Mercurial and Git with 1.7.1? It is not clear from the documentation, I just see some discussions implying I can, but I didn't find explicit statements. I'm using RB with git. I haven't used it with hg, but AFAIK you can. 3. How does ReviewBoard compare to Phabricator's review system and Atlassian's one? So far I have a hard time seeing any real difference other than the cost. Well, personally I'd have a hard time justifying spending money for a review tool unless I'm getting paid to write the software being reviewed. RB is free in both senses. (If you're willing to run your server on Fedora 18, RB 1.7.1 is even packaged by the distro.) Since you mentioned hg, it's probably not an option anyway, but I'd stay away from gerrit; it's interface is absolute rubbish compared to RB. -- Matthew -- 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: Some noob questions...
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Klaim J. Lamotte mjkl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Hi! I am considering using this tool but I have some questions to clarify ReviewBoard usage. Before the questions, just a quick note: the website states Stable: 1.7.1http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/releasenotes/dev/reviewboard/1.7.1/ In-development: 1.7 RC 1http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/releasenotes/dev/reviewboard/1.7-rc-1/ Which is not very logical and don't really feel professional either... :) Just a bug in how it computes it that got introduced. The site's being rewritten but I'll backport this fix. 0. The context I would use this is: - I'm working alone for now - I have some friends who can help by reviewing the code - until now I just gave them access to the source code but it's not perfect to do reviews In this context, is there some specific feature you think would appeal to me in ReviewBoard? I find with changes I'm writing, getting another pair of eyes really helps to catch mistakes I've made. By putting code up for someone to review, even if they're not writing code for the product, they may see something I missed, or find a better way to do something I did. Or they might learn something themselves, get a feel for my coding style, etc., which is useful if they ever start writing code for it. 1. Can I use Mercurial and Git with 1.7.1? It is not clear from the documentation, I just see some discussions implying I can, but I didn't find explicit statements. Both are supported. And many more. 2. I'm using Rhodecode to manage my repositories. It have basic review support apparently. How does ReviewBoard compare? I don't know Rhodecode. I played around with it for a few minutes to see how it compares. It looks pretty basic and standard so far. Here's what we seem to have that it doesn't: 1) Side-by-side diffs. Some people like the top-down look, but a side-by-side means we can do inline comments that span lines, better indication of what changed within a line, and more. 2) Syntax highlighting. We syntax-highlight the source code, which makes it easier to read. 3) In-line diffing. If a line of code changed (marked as a replace), we'll show exactly what changed so you don't have to read the entire line. It looks like Rhodecode is trying to do this, but it doesn't seem to work very consistently. 4) Function/class context. We show you where you are in a diff. That is, what function or class precedes the code you're looking at. 5) Diff expansion. We start off by showing you just the changed regions, with some unchanged lines surrounding it. You can expand the collapsed areas all at once, by 20 lines at a time, or expand up to the nearest function or class. 6) Move detection. We can show you when a block of code moves within a file without being changed. Useful with large changes when you're moving functions around. 7) Issue toggling. When someone leaves a comment, they can mark it as an opened issue, which basically is a TODO item for you to fix. Makes ti easier to separate general discussion from things you need to fix. 8) Image commenting. If you upload an image (screenshot or something), people can make comments right on that. We're working to expand this to other types of files as wel. 9) All comments across all files made by a user during a review are grouped together into a single box. All discussions about those comments go there. Every review gets its own box. It's easier to stay organized this way, rather than just comments inline in code in places. 10) Posting a review request to Review Board is one command on the command line, It can be done without pushing code to a central repository, allowing for pre-commit reviews. More scripts are coming, and we have a full API (REST API, and soon a Python API) for writing custom integration. 11) Extension support. While new, we've made Review Board extensible so that other people, companies, and even us can provide loadable extensions to enhance the feature set of Review Board without having to modify Review Board itself. There are other things we do, but I'll stop there. 3. How does ReviewBoard compare to Phabricator's review system and Atlassian's one? So far I have a hard time seeing any real difference other than the cost. The problem is that I didn't use any such tool so far so I don't know what kind of feature are good or not. I'm told Phabricator makes it really easy to include pictures of cats and Jean-Luc Picard facepalm images. So if that's important, you can go with them. I haven't heard anything else about how their system is to use. I haven't used Atlassian's product. All I have there is second-hand knowledge. I hear managers really like it because of all the tracking it can do based on the required fields for users. I've heard from developers that Review Board was easier for them to integrate into their workflow. I think it's just up to what your needs are.
