+1 I like the bitbucket reviews. For me, the code review tools has always
required a bit of re-learning at each submission.
>________________________________
> From: Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) <o...@lindenlab.com>
>To: Nicky Perian <nickyper...@yahoo.com>; opensource-dev
><opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com>
>Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:18 AM
>Subject: Re: code review in the new release process
>
>
>
>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 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 | Second Life Oz Linden
>
>Linden Lab| Makers of Shared Creative Spaces
>SECOND LIFE | PATTERNS | CREATORVERSE | DIO | VERSU
>Lirusaito commented on commit e6292c4
> Lirusaito commented on commit e6292c4:
>CHOP-942: fix crash if update check times out
>Words
>View this commit or add a comment by replying to this email.
>Unwatch this commit to stop receiving email updates.
>Lirusaito commented on commit e6292c4
>indra/viewer_components/updater/llupdatechecker.cpp
>121 - memcpy(mUniqueId, uniqueid, MD5HEX_STR _SIZE);
>122 - mWillingToTest = willing_to_test;
> 126 + std::string check Url = buildUrl(hostU rl, servicePath, cha
> nnel, version, platf orm, platform_versio n, uniqueid, willing _to_test);
> 127 + LL_INFOS("Updater Service") << "checki ng for updates at " <<
> checkUrl << LL_EN DL;
> Lirusaito commented on commit e6292c4:
>CHOP-942: fix crash if update check times out
>Words about this specific line
>View this commit or add a comment by replying to this email.
>123 128
>124 - mProtocol = sProto colVersion;
>125 -
>Unwatch this commit to stop receiving email updates.
>
>_______________________________________________
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
