Rietveld style code review

[hutchic]

I think it would be nice to have some Mondarian (Reitveld) style code
review.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMql3Di4Kgc

Colin

[osimons]

Agree - that would be a superb plugin. A very useful tool for
development teams.

It is open sourced using the Apache 2.0 license, so if anyone wants to
pick up this idea...:
http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/source/browse/trunk/COPYING


:::simon

https://www.coderesort.com

[Risto Kankkunen]

I just today started to use http://www.review-board.org/ in our team
at work. Seemed a bit more mature than Rietveld but I might be wrong.

I also just stumbled on http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/PeerReviewPlugin.
Seems promising. Anyone have any experience about it?

[Jani Tiainen]

Risto Kankkunen kirjoitti:

> I just today started to use http://www.review-board.org/ in our team
> at work. Seemed a bit more mature than Rietveld but I might be wrong.

I've given test go also to this review-board only thing is that they
like more to do review before commit than review after commit. Also I
wonder how this could be integrated with Trac...

> I also just stumbled on http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/PeerReviewPlugin.
> Seems promising. Anyone have any experience about it?

I tested it while ago and it was promising but major feature is lack of
changeset preview. Usually when you work you want to make review of
whole changeset but that's not possible in that plugin. At least not yet.

--
Jani Tiainen

[David Abrahams]

I don't understand why the plugin would need to do anything to
accomodate that feature, since Trac already provides it. Am I missing
something?

Thanks,

--
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com

[Risto Kankkunen]

On May 26, 8:03 am, Jani Tiainen <rede...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Risto Kankkunen kirjoitti:
>

> > I just today started to usehttp://www.review-board.org/in our team

> > at work. Seemed a bit more mature than Rietveld but I might be wrong.
>
> I've given test go also to this review-board only thing is that they
> like more to do review before commit than review after commit.

It complicates the workflow a bit that you cannot just select a
committed change set from the UI. However, the command line tool has
an option (--revision-range IIRC) that let's you specify which
revisions to review.

We actually started reviewing some old code so we generated an svn
diff between the beginning and the HEAD for a module by hand and
uploaded that diff. There were a couple of directory reorganizations
in the revision history which complicated things a bit...

So far we have been happy with the tool and plan to continue to use
it. Linking/integrating with Trac would be nice, but I think they are
currently pushing to get 1.0 out before adding any new major features.

If I have time, I'll try to check out the alternatives later.

[Matt Good]

On May 23, 11:33 am, hutchic <co...@hutchic.com> wrote:
> I think it would be nice to have some Mondarian (Reitveld) style code
> review.

I'm workin' on it ;)

I have written a plugin that we're currently using here at YouTube.
It's a little rough around the edges, but I'm in the process of
getting it ready for a public release and will certainly make an
announcement here about it.

One caveat is that the plugin is tied specifically to GVN[1] for
creating and approving reviews. GVN is a Python SVN client that wraps
the normal commands and adds a few new ones for creating micro-
branches for changes that are pending review.

-- Matt

[1] http://code.google.com/p/gvn/