OpenJDK Code review system - Request for use cases and requirements
Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Mon Apr 18 03:32:07 PDT 2011
Mohan Pakkurti wrote:
> I am looking at undertaking some projects to help improve the infrastructure for OpenJDK.
> One of the systems that is often requested is an open code review system, and I want to understand what we would want from this.
> I came across this blog entry http://blogs.sun.com/mr/entry/open_webrevs and want to get this discussion started again by asking you for input.
> What use cases would you have for this system?
> What features would you like to see in this system?
> What other systems and processes do you see the code review system integrate with?
> Any suggestions for systems we should consider for this?
> Do you have any other comments on this topic?
I see all the replies so far are from Oracle folks and it would be good
to get input from others too. It may also be useful to see what other
open projects are using, if anything.
One thing about cr.openjdk.java.net is that it's usefulness is broader
than just hosting webrevs so it would be good to keep it as it's a very
handy place to push preliminary webrevs, documents, and other items for
discussions on the lists.
Another thing that isn't clear from this mail is whether this is just
infrastructure or whether it implies process too. I've no doubt that
many areas will want to continue to discuss patches and changes via the
mailing lists even if there is a ReviewBoard/equivalent available. One
could envisage a discussion about a bug or area of code on the mailing
list before the ready-to-be-reviewed changes are published to the review
system. You asked about integration with other systems and being able to
link to prior discussions in the archives or in the (new) bug database
would be useful.
I didn't see command line access mentioned in any of the comments so
far. Many of us keep our repositories on servers and it would be be
great to be able to run a shell command to publish a change for review.
On the review side then having the ability to wget the patch file
without authentication would be useful too as sometimes it's easier to
just grab the patch and try out the changes.
On the diffs then I think Jon summarized it well and being able to
support delta webrevs/equivalent would be very useful as we often go
through many iterations where the bulk of the changes are reviewed and
we're spinning on a final few issues.
I don't have any comments on the workflow side of this except that folks
interested in an area should be able to subscribe so that they get
notifications of reviews and discussion for the areas that they are
interested in. Also the person seeking a review should be able to accept
reviews from folks that he/she didn't originally nominate to review.
More information about the web-discuss