> Hi, > > Prasanna and I've been playing with the > http://downloads.reviewboard.org/releases/RBTools/0.4/RBTools-0.4.1.tar.gz > tool for posting the reviews via a command line utility.
I've a fork of the original tool that works for me: https://github.com/bhaisaab/RBTool Usage: http://wiki.cloudstack.org/display/gen/Review+Board Example: git format-patch -o patches HEAD~1 postreview --username=<user-name> --password=<password> --diff-filename=patches/0001-myfix.patch --debug --description="description-of-my-patch" #(add -p if you want to publish right away) Test: https://reviews.apache.org/r/6299/ The patch is uploaded on paste.cloudstack.org and the link is appended to the description. Hope it works. Regards, Rohit > > We can tweak the script easily so when you submit a review request, the > original git formatted patch is uploaded to some public hosting site and will > append the link in the description. The committer can then get the original > patch with all author's info and apply it using git am. > > Regards, > Rohit > > On Aug 1, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Prasanna Santhanam > <prasanna.santha...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 09:07:07AM -0400, Wido den Hollander wrote: >>>> >>>> This was tried in the past and backfired when non-committers send >>>> through patches that get formatted by mail clients and have CRLF >>>> issues when applied by the committer. >>>> >>> >>> I think this happens when people attach their patches, but if you send >>> them with "git send-email" they will go through just fine. >>> >>> HTML mail clients and stuff make garbage of patches. That's why I'm >>> again HTML e-mail on this mailinglist. >>> >> >> True - it's not necessarily the non-committer sending it through an >> HTML client but some of our committers are forced in one way or >> another to adhere to Outlook like clients. >> >> >>>> 3) extra workflow step of submitter closing the patch request >>>> >>>> These probably should be addressed by tooling. >>> >>> Do you mean reviewboard tooling or tooling for patches through e-mail? >>> >> >> I meant reviewboard tooling/fix so it doesn't strip out author >> information and so that git am works. Rohit's beaten me to the request >> with RB's team. It might take too much time before apache infra >> decides to upgrade the reviews.a.o though. >> >> -- >> Prasanna., >
