On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 03:40:17PM -0700, Dan Price wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Codereview is a pillar of quality software development; the OpenSolaris
project does a good job of intensively reviewing changes today, but our
codereview process would would be even better if more codereviews
DR == Dean Roehrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
DR On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 03:40:17PM -0700, Dan Price wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Codereview is a pillar of quality software development; the OpenSolaris
project does a good job of intensively reviewing changes today, but our
Dean Roehrich wrote:
Could you describe the usage model? I don't see hooks to a codestriker-type
of thing. If someone puts something on grommit then what is the method for
interested reviewers to know about it? Do reviewers need to have an account?
Where should the review discussion happen?
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 04:44:19PM +0200, Casper H.S. Dik wrote:
codereview, the tool, generates a postscript file with all modified
files and the changes (insertions, deletion) in context. This is
generally much more readable than unified diffs, specifically when we're
talking about
DR == Dean Roehrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Webrev is a tool which makes a web page which includes all types of
diffs such as unified, context as well as side-by-side diffs with
collapsable context.
DR Does this allow the reviewer to extract the changes in valid unified-,
