Codestriker: collaborative code reviewer

Hi,

The obsoleted feature is for this kind of thing. Really it depends on what you are using
codestriker for. It can be used to just keep an eye on things with an occasional comment added, to
a full blown inspection system with metrics and tracked resolutions for each comment. The fact
that you are creating topics with a hook suggests you are near the "keep an eye on things" side of
the spectrum, in which case it may not be worth the extra work to put the relationship between the
topics. We don't have a way of obsoleting topics automatically (though this could be added with
some changes to codestrker and check in comment discipline). Unless you are going to spend a lot
of time doing inspections and tracking comment resolutions it is probably not worth the worth to
obsoleting older topics.

However, it would help to have some more context on what you expect to get from codestriker. 

Thanks
Jason.

--- Moisei Rabinovich <moisei@...> wrote:

> Hello dear all,
> I've setup the subversion hook to create a new topic in codestriker on every
> commit and it works just fine.
> Now, I am looking for a god way to "link" the commits done based on the
> review to the original topic.
> Is there some recommended way?
> 
> The scenario is like:
> developer commit some code [new topic created]
> the reviewer mention the problem in file X1 line Y1 and file X2 line Y2
> [mails sent]
> the developer fixes the X1,Y1 and commits [new topic is created.... not so
> good... it still relates to the origibal topic... should the original one be
> obsoleted byt he new one?]
> 
> Please advise,
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> Moisei
> > > _______________________________________________
> Codestriker-user mailing list
> Codestriker-user@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codestriker-user
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Hi Moisei,

Would you mind sharing your script/instructions as to what you had to do 
to get topics created automatically with Subversion?

I'll add this to the manual and/or distribution.  I have done this 
already with CVS, as you are aware, but don't use Subversion yet, so I'd 
like to document this for the upcoming 1.9.2 release.  I'm sure lots of 
people would find this useful.

Cheers,
David

Moisei Rabinovich wrote:
> Hello dear all,
> I've setup the subversion hook to create a new topic in codestriker on 
> every commit and it works just fine.
> Now, I am looking for a god way to "link" the commits done based on the 
> review to the original topic.
> Is there some recommended way?
> 
> The scenario is like:
> developer commit some code [new topic created]
> the reviewer mention the problem in file X1 line Y1 and file X2 line Y2 
> [mails sent]
> the developer fixes the X1,Y1 and commits [new topic is created.... not 
> so good... it still relates to the origibal topic... should the original 
> one be obsoleted byt he new one?]
> 
> Please advise,
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> Moisei
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Codestriker-user mailing list
> Codestriker-user@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codestriker-user

Moisei Rabinovich wrote:
> Hello dear all,
> I've setup the subversion hook to create a new topic in codestriker on 
> every commit and it works just fine.
> Now, I am looking for a god way to "link" the commits done based on the 
> review to the original topic.
> Is there some recommended way?
> 
> The scenario is like:
> developer commit some code [new topic created]
> the reviewer mention the problem in file X1 line Y1 and file X2 line Y2 
> [mails sent]
> the developer fixes the X1,Y1 and commits [new topic is created.... not 
> so good... it still relates to the origibal topic... should the original 
> one be obsoleted byt he new one?]

Yes, we need to somehow obsolete the original topic with the new topic. 
  This is easy to do if the topics are created "by hand", but via the 
SCM commit hook, we need to handle this in a different way.

I can see a couple of options here, which Jason has already eluded to:

* In the topic description, we could perhaps introduce another magical 
auto-link text, so that if you type in Topic 73514332, this would 
automatically hyperlink to that topic.  We actually do this with Bug 
XXXX text if a bug tracker has been enabled.

That way, the developer can add the Topic XXXXXXX text to their commit 
message, as a way of linking topics together.

They can actually do this today, just by adding a full hyperlink to the 
topic they are obsoleting, as Codestriker will render hyperlinks 
automatically.

* Another option would be to have a new field in the topic properties 
tab, something like "Superseeds Topics: XXXXXX", as a way of creating an 
obsolete link directly.  The onus would be on somebody to then update 
this field to maintain your links.

Does anyone else have any other ideas?

Cheers,
David

Hi,
yes, it's kind of "keep an eye" code review type, just note we are 25
developers team working on the regular base.
Usually we have about 100 commits a day, so the "eye" must be a strong one.
I can implement an obsolete through the svn hook - it's not a big deal,
simple build the http post carefully.
But what I really missing in codestriker is a kind of relationships between
topics.
It's more complicate than just obsoleteusually topics has few comments not
just one,
from the developer point of view , the commits fix some of them, not all in
one shot and some commits
could fix the the comments from different topics.
On other hand, from the reviewer point of view it would be much easy to
follow the full review history of each issue,
then browse through the different topics as she has to do now.
The ven more complicated case when the fix is not acccepted by the reviewer
or the fix raises new issues.

As the first step in this direction, I would propose to have the uniq
identifier for each topic (in our case it's a revision)
and uniq identifier for each item inside of the topic (simple numbers
generated automatically ).

On 6/22/06, David Sitsky < sits@...> wrote:
>
> Moisei Rabinovich wrote:
> > Hello dear all,
> > I've setup the subversion hook to create a new topic in codestriker on
> > every commit and it works just fine.
> > Now, I am looking for a god way to "link" the commits done based on the
> > review to the original topic.
> > Is there some recommended way?
> >
> > The scenario is like:
> > developer commit some code [new topic created]
> > the reviewer mention the problem in file X1 line Y1 and file X2 line Y2
> > [mails sent]
> > the developer fixes the X1,Y1 and commits [new topic is created.... not
> > so good... it still relates to the origibal topic... should the original
> > one be obsoleted byt he new one?]
>
> Yes, we need to somehow obsolete the original topic with the new topic.
>   This is easy to do if the topics are created "by hand", but via the
> SCM commit hook, we need to handle this in a different way.
>
> I can see a couple of options here, which Jason has already eluded to:
>
> * In the topic description, we could perhaps introduce another magical
> auto-link text, so that if you type in Topic 73514332, this would
> automatically hyperlink to that topic.  We actually do this with Bug
> XXXX text if a bug tracker has been enabled.
>
> That way, the developer can add the Topic XXXXXXX text to their commit
> message, as a way of linking topics together.
>
> They can actually do this today, just by adding a full hyperlink to the
> topic they are obsoleting, as Codestriker will render hyperlinks
> automatically.
>
> * Another option would be to have a new field in the topic properties
> tab, something like "Superseeds Topics: XXXXXX", as a way of creating an
> obsolete link directly.  The onus would be on somebody to then update
> this field to maintain your links.
>
> Does anyone else have any other ideas?
>
> Cheers,
> David
>

Hi,

It sounds to me like you really want to look at the repository/codestriker from an issue point of
view, rather than a check in point of view. Do you always put the issue numbers into the checkin
comment? Codestriker can't do this, but lets imagine for the sake of the discussion the following.

1. The top level cs window showed one topic per issue.
2. When you clicked on the "issue" topic, it would show all of the commits + comments that include
that comment in its checkin comment. The commits would be shown newest to oldest in the topic.

How does this sound?

Back to earth, codestriker generates a topicid that is random and unique per topic when it is
added in. It is primary key of the topic table. The commentdata_table also has a unique id.

Thanks
Jason

--- Moisei Rabinovich <moisei@...> wrote:

> Hi,
> yes, it's kind of "keep an eye" code review type, just note we are 25
> developers team working on the regular base.
> Usually we have about 100 commits a day, so the "eye" must be a strong one.
> I can implement an obsolete through the svn hook - it's not a big deal,
> simple build the http post carefully.
> But what I really missing in codestriker is a kind of relationships between
> topics.
> It's more complicate than just obsoleteusually topics has few comments not
> just one,
> from the developer point of view , the commits fix some of them, not all in
> one shot and some commits
> could fix the the comments from different topics.
> On other hand, from the reviewer point of view it would be much easy to
> follow the full review history of each issue,
> then browse through the different topics as she has to do now.
> The ven more complicated case when the fix is not acccepted by the reviewer
> or the fix raises new issues.
> 
> As the first step in this direction, I would propose to have the uniq
> identifier for each topic (in our case it's a revision)
> and uniq identifier for each item inside of the topic (simple numbers
> generated automatically ).
> 
> On 6/22/06, David Sitsky < sits@...> wrote:
> >
> > Moisei Rabinovich wrote:
> > > Hello dear all,
> > > I've setup the subversion hook to create a new topic in codestriker on
> > > every commit and it works just fine.
> > > Now, I am looking for a god way to "link" the commits done based on the
> > > review to the original topic.
> > > Is there some recommended way?
> > >
> > > The scenario is like:
> > > developer commit some code [new topic created]
> > > the reviewer mention the problem in file X1 line Y1 and file X2 line Y2
> > > [mails sent]
> > > the developer fixes the X1,Y1 and commits [new topic is created.... not
> > > so good... it still relates to the origibal topic... should the original
> > > one be obsoleted byt he new one?]
> >
> > Yes, we need to somehow obsolete the original topic with the new topic.
> >   This is easy to do if the topics are created "by hand", but via the
> > SCM commit hook, we need to handle this in a different way.
> >
> > I can see a couple of options here, which Jason has already eluded to:
> >
> > * In the topic description, we could perhaps introduce another magical
> > auto-link text, so that if you type in Topic 73514332, this would
> > automatically hyperlink to that topic.  We actually do this with Bug
> > XXXX text if a bug tracker has been enabled.
> >
> > That way, the developer can add the Topic XXXXXXX text to their commit
> > message, as a way of linking topics together.
> >
> > They can actually do this today, just by adding a full hyperlink to the
> > topic they are obsoleting, as Codestriker will render hyperlinks
> > automatically.
> >
> > * Another option would be to have a new field in the topic properties
> > tab, something like "Superseeds Topics: XXXXXX", as a way of creating an
> > obsolete link directly.  The onus would be on somebody to then update
> > this field to maintain your links.
> >
> > Does anyone else have any other ideas?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > _______________________________________________
> Codestriker-user mailing list
> Codestriker-user@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codestriker-user
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

> 2. When you clicked on the "issue" topic, it would show all of the commits
+ comments that include
> that comment in its checkin comment. The commits would be shown newest to
oldest in the topic.
yes! and if there will be another button like "close all the related topics"
- it would almost ideal.

> It sounds to me like you really want to look at the repository/codestriker
from an issue point of
> view, rather than a check in point of view. Do you always put the issue
numbers into the checkin
> comment? Codestriker can't do this, but lets imagine for the sake of the
discussion the following.
we have our own issue tracker and we use the "stable branches" model.
the policy is that commit to the "stable branch" mandatory has an issue
reference (it's checked by the svn hook).
for the trunk it is not mandatory. but I do not plan (at least now) to have
an integration between issue tracker and codestriker.
I can put in place another policy to have a topic-id somehow recognizable
mentioned in that commits
that answer some other code-strike comments (well, as I told, in our case
the uniq id is the revision, so I can require to
write in the comment something like #r12345 so I can translate it through
the svn hook to the real codestriker id)
and then the svn hook will update the codestriker accordingly - i.e create
new topic that includes comments to the mentioned ones.

Thanks!