On Jul 16, 3:32 pm, Øyvind Jensen <jensen.oyv...@gmail.com> wrote: > fr., 16.07.2010 kl. 03.00 -0700, skrev smichr: > Given the complexity of the patchset, I would recommend to use the > smartbear web hosted tool that Andy and I used for reviewing the fortran > code generator. Andy fixed it so that we have a free hosting for the > Sympy project on their demo server, see this > post:http://groups.google.com/group/sympy/msg/40cf5f5327d9fcd3 > > I think you will benefit from that for two reasons: > > 1) On smartbear it is the final result that is reviewed, rather than > each patch. This means it is possible to attach comments issues to > specific lines in the final code, so there is emphasis on the big > picture. > > 2) Everything is organized in phases. When you upload the code you start > a review phase. When all reviewers have set their status to "done", it > fixing time. When you are done it goes into a review phase again. The > phases ensure that everyone knows when it is their move, and so it can > speed up the process. > > If you are interested I can upload the patches for you, to get you > started.
This sounds perfect. I'll try be a quick study if you can get this going for me. Is this agreeable to everyone else who might be reviewing? And Aaron, perhaps what I should do as I go through the patches with a fine-toothed comb is to just add commits on top of a clone of t and only add the changes via smartbear when it's time. I know I have 12 commits that need log messages. Shall I make those first, announce a freeze and then make the move to smartbear? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
