Here's an RB example with multiple (6) patch revisions: https://review.cloudera.org/r/402/
I suspect we'd have to do something like you (ben) suggest - use rev# in the patch name (jira) and reference that name in RB when adding the description for the updated diff. It's ugly given the lack of integration btw rb and jira. I wonder how the other teams are handling this (hbase? ccing Todd). Patrick On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Benjamin Reed <br...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > i'm talking about iterations of the same patch. if you review a patch and > the contributor updates the patch and you want to review it again, how do > you correlate the reviews with the different iterations of the same patch? > > ben > > On 01/11/2011 01:51 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: >> >> Hey Ben, if we have multiple patches in the same jira, perhaps we should >> use subtasks and name the review requests accordingly? Does it work for the >> cases you're referring to? >> >> I was wondering, though, what other projects do to maintain the jira >> consistent with respect to discussion on the review board, if anything. We >> should at least post the link to the review board request so that we have it >> documented. >> >> -Flavio >> >> On Jan 9, 2011, at 7:47 AM, Benjamin Reed wrote: >> >>> hey, reviewboard is pretty cool. i'm wonder about conventions to using >>> it. the problem is how to correlate the review with the patch. since a >>> JIRA number may contain multiple patches, we need a way to identify a >>> particular patch. perhaps we should name our patches >>> ZOOKEEPER-<JIRA#>_<revision#>, then we can use the patch name when we >>> create a review board request. what do you all think? >>> >>> thanx >>> ben >> >> *flavio* >> *junqueira* >> >> research scientist >> >> f...@yahoo-inc.com <mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com> >> direct +34 93-183-8828 >> >> avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, es >> phone (408) 349 3300fax (408) 349 3301 >> >> > >
