Re: Google Code shutting down

[Trevor Daniels]

Carl Sorensen wrote Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:32 PM

>>On 11/05/15 23:04, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>>> Phil Holmes wrote Monday, May 11, 2015 6:21 PM
>>>
>>>> Have you investigated the API for patch and git-cl?
>>> I've quickly looked at Allura's API.  It seems to contain all the
>>>features we would need.  I've also looked at git-cl, but unpicking that
>>>is someway outside my comfort zone.  It's built around code obtained
>>>from Google.  I don't plan to work on git-cl's conversion, so we need
>>>some other volunteer to do that.  Any takers?  I've not even looked at
>>>patchy.
> 
> I'm willing to take a stab at the git-cl stuff.  I've done a quick look;
> if we are going to continue to use Rietveld as our code review tool, the
> changes to git-cl are almost certainly very minor.  The main piece of the
> API we would need to use is to get the URL associated with a given issue
> number.  I believe that the Allura API has the call needed to get the URL
> (I expect it's part of the JSON representation), but I haven't yet tested
> it.

That's great Carl!  Let's use the testlily project at SourceForge as the 
test-bed:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/testlily/

If you let me have your SourceForge username I'll add you as an Administrator.  
That will give you access to everything you need.  I think there are some other 
hoops to jump through to get at the API but you'll soon find those.

>>Do we even need a new git-cl?
>>
>>I am no expert but wasn't that designed to get around the fact that we
>>had to upload to two different places (one place for actual review and
>>one for a note on the tracker). Does this new place come with it's own
>>workflow and so it would be a case of 'use their tools' and update the
>>CG with the instructions - at least as an interim solution.
> 
> I think this may be worth looking at as well.  But for right now, I really
> like the way Rietveld handles code reviews.  As you suggested,  git-cl
> ties the Rietveld review number to the LilyPond issue number.  Since we're
> not (currently) proposing to change the review hosting service, most of
> git-cl will continue to work unchanged, as I see it right now.

I agree.  Rietveld is fine, and keeping it minimises the necessary changes.

Trevor