Hi Pradeep, On Aug 2, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Pradeep Soundararajan <pradeep.soundarara...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Hi Rohit, > > I have already created the RB wiki for our team. Could you please post your > findings there if anything is not covered. > > http://wiki.cloudstack.org/display/gen/Review+Board > > Also, please let me know are you able to post your review through command > line? Yes, it works for me. The problem is with the RB and not the command line tool, I've shared a workaround that I'll be using in future till RB guys fix the issue. Rohit > > The last issue I have found before I have come out from RB is most of them > are unable to post their review through command line. I am able to post the > same after some minor tweak. It will be good if you elaborate this…. > > Thanks, > Pradeep.S > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 2:13 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: non-committer workflow > > Hi Rajesh, > ________________________________________ > From: Rajesh Battala [rajesh.batt...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 8:46 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: non-committer workflow > > Rohit, > > Pradeep had played and tweaked the same tools for our team. If you are going > to share about the tool, you can talk to Pradeep to share more stuff about it > . > > Sure, I almost missed your email and went ahead with a tweak. Anyway, it > works for me. > > Regards. > > Thanks > Rajesh Battala > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 8:03 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: non-committer workflow > > 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. > > 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., >
