On 2013-05-22 22:59 , Nicky Perian asks:
Which repositories will be used to open code review? Will each project
be available for code review?
An excellent pair of questions... I'll take them in reverse order.
*How will you know which repositories are active, and will they be
reviewable?*
Our intent is that sources for development projects will become
publicly visible /approximately/ when both:
* A public test viewer is made available (whether as a Project or
Beta viewer)
* The design, especially any server interactions, is believed to
be reasonably stable
(if the goal of releasing a viewer is to find out whether or not
a particular design works, we don't want to put the sources out
where someone might pull them because then important changes to
the design may create compatibility problems; the materials
project kept its sources private for some time for this reason).
I say approximately because each project will make that decision
independently; for some, making sources public may be a high
priority (such as getting important bug fixes out where others can
pick them up), while others may take longer. This is a guideline
for our teams, not a hard and fast promise, but we are very much
aware that it's in our interest to get new features adopted by the
open source community in a timely way, so we have ample motivation
to make sources public.
To that end, I will be maintaining a wiki page that will display all
of our Viewer channels and the latest viewers in the channel.
Channels that include candidate viewer cohorts (normally only the
release channel) will display both the default viewer and the
candidates. For each viewer, there will be a link to the
repository, the changeset id it was built from, and an indicator as
to whether or not that repository is public. I've already created
the program to generate this page content, and will try to update
the page promptly when changes are made. The page will appear
shortly after we begin using the new viewer version management
system (the generation program relies on queries against that
service). Incidentally - this will be separate from the
user-oriented official Alternate Viewers page, which will provide
the download links for each publicly available viewer.
Bitbucket provides a 'watch' feature you can use to be notified when
changes are made to repository - you can use that to monitor both
viewer-release and any other repository, so I won't be configuring
email notices on any of the new repositories.
*Which brings us to code reviews...*
The ReviewBoard instance at codereview.secondlife.com has been valuable,
I think, but it has some significant problems - specifically it:
* Isn't integrated with Jira
* Isn't integrated with Bitbucket
* Requires fairly complex manipulation to post reviews of code in
repositories not directly descended from one of the configured repos
(see Posting Failure
<https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Code_Review_Tool#Posting_Failure>
in the wiki documentation)
This goes directly to Nickys question, really, and I am not crazy
about the idea of constantly having to configure each project
repository... if only because it would get cluttered very quickly
* Is rather a pain for me to keep up to date
(updates require that I re-merge changes we need that for some
reason the developers have never integrated my contributions for)...
we're actually pretty far behind the most recent releases as a result.
Since I set up that review system, Bitbucket has significantly improved
their display of differences in a commit and added some code review
features (I like to think that my quite detailed feedback to them on
this played some part in that). If you display the page for a specific
commit, there is a way to comment on both the commit as a whole (a box
at the top) and on any specific line (click on the speech bubble to the
left of the line). The comments are then both mailed to the author of
the commit and displayed on the page. There's a way to reply to each,
and there's an Approve button at the top that registers your approval of
the commit.
Using Bitbucket for reviews would place a premium on arranging your
changes as a single commit that does not have any embedded merges. As a
former/sometime git user, I prefer to do that anyway. It's a little
less convenient in Mercurial, but it's not that hard.
On the whole, I think that using the Bitbucket review system would be
much easier than the existing ReviewBoard; it seems to me that the only
significant disadvantage is that it doesn't post review requests to this
list, but putting together an email with a link doesn't seem to me to be
too much to ask.
Opinions? Experiments?
--
*Scott Lawrence* | /Director of Open Development/
Skype ozlinden <skype://ozlinden> | Second Life Oz Linden
<https://my.secondlife.com/oz.linden>
Linden Lab| Makers of Shared Creative Spaces <http://lindenlab.com/>
SECOND LIFE <http://secondlife.com/> | PATTERNS
<http://buildpatterns.com/> | CREATORVERSE <http://creatorverse.com/> |
DIO <http://dio.com/> | VERSU <http://versu.com/>
--- Begin Message ---
--- you can reply above this line ---
New comment on commit:
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-3.5.3/commits/e6292c4abe4dc6a52fbbae2515f21e65167bfd1a#comment-271736
Lirusaito said:
Words
--
Unwatch this commit to stop receiving email updates:
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-3.5.3/commits/e6292c4abe4dc6a52fbbae2515f21e65167bfd1a/unwatch/oz_linden/2fe8c4e62e470bf210eea01f2fd18ceaf18cd67c/
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
--- you can reply above this line ---
New comment on commit:
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-3.5.3/commits/e6292c4abe4dc6a52fbbae2515f21e65167bfd1a#comment-271739
Lirusaito said:
Words about this specific line
--
Unwatch this commit to stop receiving email updates:
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-3.5.3/commits/e6292c4abe4dc6a52fbbae2515f21e65167bfd1a/unwatch/oz_linden/2fe8c4e62e470bf210eea01f2fd18ceaf18cd67c/
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
