[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Google Code shutting down
From: |
Trevor Daniels |
Subject: |
Re: Google Code shutting down |
Date: |
Tue, 12 May 2015 20:54:18 +0100 |
Carl Sorensen wrote Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:32 PM
>>On 11/05/15 23:04, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>>> Phil Holmes wrote Monday, May 11, 2015 6:21 PM
>>>
>>>> Have you investigated the API for patch and git-cl?
>>> I've quickly looked at Allura's API. It seems to contain all the
>>>features we would need. I've also looked at git-cl, but unpicking that
>>>is someway outside my comfort zone. It's built around code obtained
>>>from Google. I don't plan to work on git-cl's conversion, so we need
>>>some other volunteer to do that. Any takers? I've not even looked at
>>>patchy.
>
> I'm willing to take a stab at the git-cl stuff. I've done a quick look;
> if we are going to continue to use Rietveld as our code review tool, the
> changes to git-cl are almost certainly very minor. The main piece of the
> API we would need to use is to get the URL associated with a given issue
> number. I believe that the Allura API has the call needed to get the URL
> (I expect it's part of the JSON representation), but I haven't yet tested
> it.
That's great Carl! Let's use the testlily project at SourceForge as the
test-bed:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/testlily/
If you let me have your SourceForge username I'll add you as an Administrator.
That will give you access to everything you need. I think there are some other
hoops to jump through to get at the API but you'll soon find those.
>>Do we even need a new git-cl?
>>
>>I am no expert but wasn't that designed to get around the fact that we
>>had to upload to two different places (one place for actual review and
>>one for a note on the tracker). Does this new place come with it's own
>>workflow and so it would be a case of 'use their tools' and update the
>>CG with the instructions - at least as an interim solution.
>
> I think this may be worth looking at as well. But for right now, I really
> like the way Rietveld handles code reviews. As you suggested, git-cl
> ties the Rietveld review number to the LilyPond issue number. Since we're
> not (currently) proposing to change the review hosting service, most of
> git-cl will continue to work unchanged, as I see it right now.
I agree. Rietveld is fine, and keeping it minimises the necessary changes.
Trevor
- Re: Google Code shutting down, (continued)
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Phil Holmes, 2015/05/03
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2015/05/06
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/06
- Message not available
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/11
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Phil Holmes, 2015/05/11
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/11
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Phil Holmes, 2015/05/11
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/11
- Re: Google Code shutting down, James, 2015/05/12
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Carl Sorensen, 2015/05/12
- Re: Google Code shutting down,
Trevor Daniels <=
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/12
- Re: Google Code shutting down, James Lowe, 2015/05/19
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Marc Hohl, 2015/05/19
- Message not available
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/16
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Phil Holmes, 2015/05/16
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/16
- Re: Google Code shutting down, David Kastrup, 2015/05/16
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/16
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Google Code shutting down, Trevor Daniels, 2015/05/17
- Re: Google Code shutting down, David Kastrup, 2015/05/17