[webkit-dev] to reitveld or not to reitveld

[Mark Rowe]

On 2009-06-05, at 19:02, Darren VanBuren wrote:

> Surprisingly, the bug isn't a duplicate, or if there is a dupe, it  
> isn't filed correctly.
>
> But I agree that any code review tool should be integrated with bugs.webkit.org 
> , otherwise there would be a huge disorganized mess and it wouldn't  
> be any better.
>
> Bugzilla wouldn't be hard to extend for this purpose, just adding a  
> field for review status and then making whatever code review tool  
> you chose update Bugzilla solves (b).
>
> Some modifications in the tool could also make it attach the patches  
> to a bug, and you could also update any field in the bug.
>
> I mean, retiveld seems like a wonderful tool, it seems like  
> something that would extend Bugzilla quite nicely. Pushing data to  
> Bugzilla can simply be done with XML-RPC according to this page on bugzilla.org 
> : http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/tip/en/html/api/Bugzilla/WebService/Server/XMLRPC.html 
>  and there's plenty of XML libraries for Python you could use to  
> work over XML-RPC.

I don't think that duplicating data in two systems and pushing it back  
and forth via an RPC mechanism is what Dave had in mind when he was  
speaking of tight integration.  We need to *streamline* the process of  
uploading and reviewing a patch, and having two different ways to do  
this seems like a large step in the opposite direction.

- Mark

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20090605/6422269b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3166 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20090605/6422269b/attachment.bin>