mirror of https://github.com/asterisk/asterisk
You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
128 lines
4.5 KiB
128 lines
4.5 KiB
/*
|
|
* Asterisk -- An open source telephony toolkit.
|
|
*
|
|
* Copyright (C) 1999 - 2009, Digium, Inc.
|
|
*
|
|
* See http://www.asterisk.org for more information about
|
|
* the Asterisk project. Please do not directly contact
|
|
* any of the maintainers of this project for assistance;
|
|
* the project provides a web site, mailing lists and IRC
|
|
* channels for your use.
|
|
*
|
|
* This program is free software, distributed under the terms of
|
|
* the GNU General Public License Version 2. See the LICENSE file
|
|
* at the top of the source tree.
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
/*!
|
|
* \file
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
/*!
|
|
* \page Reviewboard Reviewboard Usage and Guidelines
|
|
*
|
|
* \AsteriskTrunkWarning
|
|
*
|
|
* <hr/>
|
|
*
|
|
* \section ReviewboardGuidelines Usage Guidelines
|
|
*
|
|
* Mantis (https://issues.asterisk.org) and Reviewboard (https://reviewboard.asterisk.org)
|
|
* are both utilities that the Asterisk development community uses to help
|
|
* track and review code being written for Asterisk. Since both systems
|
|
* are used for posting patches, it is worth discussing when it is appropriate
|
|
* to use reviewboard and when not.
|
|
*
|
|
* Here are the situations in which it is appropriate to post code to reviewboard:
|
|
* - A committer has a patch that they would like to get some feedback on before
|
|
* merging into one of the main branches.
|
|
* - A committer or bug marshal has requested a contributor to post their patch
|
|
* from Mantis on reviewboard to aid in the review process. This typically
|
|
* happens with complex code contributions where reviewboard can help aid in
|
|
* providing feedback.
|
|
*
|
|
* We do encourage all interested parties to participate in the review process.
|
|
* However, aside from the cases mentioned above, we prefer that all code
|
|
* submissions first go through Mantis.
|
|
*
|
|
* \note It is acceptable for a committer to post patches to reviewboard before
|
|
* they are complete to get some feedback on the approach being taken. However,
|
|
* if the code is not yet ready to be merged, it \b must be documented as such.
|
|
* A review request with a patch proposed for merging should have documented
|
|
* testing and should not have blatant coding guidelines violations. Lack of
|
|
* these things is careless and shows disrespect for those reviewing your code.
|
|
*
|
|
* <hr/>
|
|
*
|
|
* \section ReviewboardPosting Posting Code to Reviewboard
|
|
*
|
|
* \subsection postreview Using post-review
|
|
*
|
|
* The easiest way to post a patch to reviewboard is by using the
|
|
* post-review tool. We have post-review in our repotools svn repository.
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ svn co http://svn.digium.com/svn/repotools
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* Essentially, post-review is a script that will take the output of "svn
|
|
* diff" and create a review request out of it for you. So, once you have
|
|
* a working copy with the changes you expect in the output of "svn diff",
|
|
* you just run the following command:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ post-review
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* If it complains about not knowing which reviewboard server to use, add
|
|
* the server option:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ post-review --server=https://reviewboard.asterisk.org
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* \subsection postreviewnewfiles Dealing with New Files
|
|
*
|
|
* I have one final note about an oddity with using post-review. If you
|
|
* maintain your code in a team branch, and the new code includes new
|
|
* files, there are some additional steps you must take to get post-review
|
|
* to behave properly.
|
|
*
|
|
* You would start by getting your changes applied to a trunk working copy:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ cd .../trunk
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* Then, apply the changes from your branch:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ svn merge .../trunk .../team/group/my_new_code
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* Now, the code is merged into your working copy. However, for a new
|
|
* file, subversion treats it as a copy of existing content and not new
|
|
* content, so new files don't show up in "svn diff" at this point. To get
|
|
* it to show up in the diff, use the following commands so svn treats it
|
|
* as new content and publishes it in the diff:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ svn revert my_new_file.c
|
|
$ svn add my_new_file.c
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*
|
|
* Now, it should work, and you can run "post-review" as usual.
|
|
*
|
|
* \subsection postreviewupdate Updating Patch on Existing Review Request
|
|
*
|
|
* Most of the time, a patch on reviewboard will require multiple iterations
|
|
* before other sign off on it being ready to be merged. To update the diff
|
|
* for an existing review request, you can use post-review and the -r option.
|
|
* Apply the current version of the diff to a working copy as described above,
|
|
* and then run the following command:
|
|
*
|
|
\verbatim
|
|
$ post-review -r <review request number>
|
|
\endverbatim
|
|
*/
|