ReviewRequest 1672 - Feedback
1 view
Skip to first unread message
mrhiccup
Jul 19, 2010, 8:38:30 AM7/19/10
to reviewboard-dev
Hi,
one month ago I posted a review request
http://reviews.reviewboard.org/r/1672/
where build servers such as hudson could be informed about new and
changed review requests.
Could you give me feedback about what you think of the feature and
whether it could make into the code base?
If the feature can make it into the code base, than I will rebase it
onto the current master and of course incorporate all your feedback.
Bastian
one month ago I posted a review request
http://reviews.reviewboard.org/r/1672/
where build servers such as hudson could be informed about new and
changed review requests.
Could you give me feedback about what you think of the feature and
whether it could make into the code base?
If the feature can make it into the code base, than I will rebase it
onto the current master and of course incorporate all your feedback.
Bastian
Christian Hammond
Jul 19, 2010, 2:43:16 PM7/19/10
to reviewb...@googlegroups.com
Hi,
I've mostly been concentrating on getting 1.5 ready to ship, so I haven't been reviewing much code lately.
I love the idea of integration like this, but let me quickly tell you where we stand on it. We're trying to keep the core of Review Board nice and simple, without features that are specific to one setup or another. Hudson support is something I want, but it can't be done today, or we'll just get hammered with questions about Tinderbox, Buildbot, etc. If something like this went into the codebase, it would have to be designed in such a way where it supported a variety of systems cleanly, and we'd have to be comfortable enough with it to support it as part of the product.
What we are doing, though, is building in mechanisms for third parties to easily extend Review Board. There are three efforts:
1) The web API, which has been revamped in RB 1.5, and is useful more for when you want other tools to talk to Review Board.
2) WebHooks support, which will be landing in 1.6. This allows Review Board to notify another service (such as some bridge service between Review Board and something else) when something on the server has changed (a review request was posted, updated, etc.)
3) Extension support. This is the big one. This will allow people to write loadable extensions for Review Board that introduce new features, new UI, new settings, etc. This will probably be coming in 2.0, but that's hopefully not *too* far off, at least for people to start testing. The extension framework lives on a couple branches and is pretty far along.
Christian
--
Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
I've mostly been concentrating on getting 1.5 ready to ship, so I haven't been reviewing much code lately.
I love the idea of integration like this, but let me quickly tell you where we stand on it. We're trying to keep the core of Review Board nice and simple, without features that are specific to one setup or another. Hudson support is something I want, but it can't be done today, or we'll just get hammered with questions about Tinderbox, Buildbot, etc. If something like this went into the codebase, it would have to be designed in such a way where it supported a variety of systems cleanly, and we'd have to be comfortable enough with it to support it as part of the product.
What we are doing, though, is building in mechanisms for third parties to easily extend Review Board. There are three efforts:
1) The web API, which has been revamped in RB 1.5, and is useful more for when you want other tools to talk to Review Board.
2) WebHooks support, which will be landing in 1.6. This allows Review Board to notify another service (such as some bridge service between Review Board and something else) when something on the server has changed (a review request was posted, updated, etc.)
3) Extension support. This is the big one. This will allow people to write loadable extensions for Review Board that introduce new features, new UI, new settings, etc. This will probably be coming in 2.0, but that's hopefully not *too* far off, at least for people to start testing. The extension framework lives on a couple branches and is pretty far along.
Christian
--
Christian Hammond - chi...@chipx86.com
Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org
VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages