You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mesos.apache.org by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com> on 2014/05/09 09:22:33 UTC
Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range usage
for rbt 0.6+
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for mesos.
Repository: mesos-git
Description
-------
Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
Diffs
-----
support/post-reviews.py 2d5447b44450bf5bf1452c5b723ff95b594312eb
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
Testing
-------
./support/post-reviews.py
Thanks,
Steven Phung
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Not to get off topic but do you think it would be worth considering upgrading to rbt for contributions instead? (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1357)
>
> The way post-reviews.py is going at the moment it would be this weird interweaving between supporting both post-review and rbt. The reason for this maintainability because their outputs and inputs are both slightly different. As described in MESOS-1357 if we had an isolated version of rbt it would be much less error prone. My guess as to the differences we are seeing assuming I'm not an idiot is how our global installations differ.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> More thinking aloud on the above topic. Maybe it would make the most sense to separate rbt from post-review and then phase out post-review over time. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
>
> Vinod Kone wrote:
> I'm using RBT 0.5.7.
>
> I tested this as follows:
>
> git co master
> git pull
> git co -b test_branch
> ...make some edits...
> git commit -am "commit 1"
> ...make some edits...
> git commit -am "commit 2"
> ./support/apply_review.sh 21257 # get the post-reviews update from this review. i modified the commit message to remove "Review:.." line so that I can create a new review for this commit too.
>
> # At this point my branch has 3 commits (2 of my own and 1 from this review)
> ./post-reviews.py
>
> # I expect this to produce 3 review requests for 3 commits. But it produces 3 reviews all with the same summary as "commit 3" and diff as "commit 3".
>
Awesome, I can reproduce the issue you are experiencing if I use RBT 0.5.7, thanks for the info. The command line parameters between rbt 0.5.7 and 0.6 are different apparently.
0.5.7 -- Usage: rbt post [options] [changenum]
0.6 -- rbt post [options] [revisions]
How should we go about supporting rbt from within post-reviews.py if we should? If you easy_install -U RBTools like it suggests in the documentation at http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/dev/ you will have RBTools 0.6 installed onto your system.
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Not to get off topic but do you think it would be worth considering upgrading to rbt for contributions instead? (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1357)
>
> The way post-reviews.py is going at the moment it would be this weird interweaving between supporting both post-review and rbt. The reason for this maintainability because their outputs and inputs are both slightly different. As described in MESOS-1357 if we had an isolated version of rbt it would be much less error prone. My guess as to the differences we are seeing assuming I'm not an idiot is how our global installations differ.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> More thinking aloud on the above topic. Maybe it would make the most sense to separate rbt from post-review and then phase out post-review over time. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
>
> Vinod Kone wrote:
> I'm using RBT 0.5.7.
>
> I tested this as follows:
>
> git co master
> git pull
> git co -b test_branch
> ...make some edits...
> git commit -am "commit 1"
> ...make some edits...
> git commit -am "commit 2"
> ./support/apply_review.sh 21257 # get the post-reviews update from this review. i modified the commit message to remove "Review:.." line so that I can create a new review for this commit too.
>
> # At this point my branch has 3 commits (2 of my own and 1 from this review)
> ./post-reviews.py
>
> # I expect this to produce 3 review requests for 3 commits. But it produces 3 reviews all with the same summary as "commit 3" and diff as "commit 3".
>
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Awesome, I can reproduce the issue you are experiencing if I use RBT 0.5.7, thanks for the info. The command line parameters between rbt 0.5.7 and 0.6 are different apparently.
>
> 0.5.7 -- Usage: rbt post [options] [changenum]
> 0.6 -- rbt post [options] [revisions]
>
> How should we go about supporting rbt from within post-reviews.py if we should? If you easy_install -U RBTools like it suggests in the documentation at http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/rbtools/dev/ you will have RBTools 0.6 installed onto your system.
Since post-review is only removed in 0.6, making rbt work for 0.6+ seems fine. I'll commit this now. Thanks.
- Vinod
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Not to get off topic but do you think it would be worth considering upgrading to rbt for contributions instead? (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1357)
>
> The way post-reviews.py is going at the moment it would be this weird interweaving between supporting both post-review and rbt. The reason for this maintainability because their outputs and inputs are both slightly different. As described in MESOS-1357 if we had an isolated version of rbt it would be much less error prone. My guess as to the differences we are seeing assuming I'm not an idiot is how our global installations differ.
More thinking aloud on the above topic. Maybe it would make the most sense to separate rbt from post-review and then phase out post-review over time. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Not to get off topic but do you think it would be worth considering upgrading to rbt for contributions instead? (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1357)
>
> The way post-reviews.py is going at the moment it would be this weird interweaving between supporting both post-review and rbt. The reason for this maintainability because their outputs and inputs are both slightly different. As described in MESOS-1357 if we had an isolated version of rbt it would be much less error prone. My guess as to the differences we are seeing assuming I'm not an idiot is how our global installations differ.
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> More thinking aloud on the above topic. Maybe it would make the most sense to separate rbt from post-review and then phase out post-review over time. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
I'm using RBT 0.5.7.
I tested this as follows:
git co master
git pull
git co -b test_branch
...make some edits...
git commit -am "commit 1"
...make some edits...
git commit -am "commit 2"
./support/apply_review.sh 21257 # get the post-reviews update from this review. i modified the commit message to remove "Review:.." line so that I can create a new review for this commit too.
# At this point my branch has 3 commits (2 of my own and 1 from this review)
./post-reviews.py
# I expect this to produce 3 review requests for 3 commits. But it produces 3 reviews all with the same summary as "commit 3" and diff as "commit 3".
- Vinod
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 16, 2014, 5:51 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> That's not good... let me look into this further. Could you provide me the details of how you invoke post-reviews by chance? Maybe I'm not doing it in the same way and missing something obvious.
Not to get off topic but do you think it would be worth considering upgrading to rbt for contributions instead? (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1357)
The way post-reviews.py is going at the moment it would be this weird interweaving between supporting both post-review and rbt. The reason for this maintainability because their outputs and inputs are both slightly different. As described in MESOS-1357 if we had an isolated version of rbt it would be much less error prone. My guess as to the differences we are seeing assuming I'm not an idiot is how our global installations differ.
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43226
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hmm. I tested this on a branch with two commits. Neither the diffs nor the titles seem to be correct. Both the generated reviews had the same diff and title!?
- Vinod Kone
On May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated May 16, 2014, 2:02 a.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
Changes
-------
Corrected commit amending
I forgot to strip the output of executing the post command. The output of post-review has the last line being the review url. The difference between the output of rbt and post-review is that rbt has it on the second to the last line with the last line being the diff url(e.g. https://reviews.apache.org/r/21545/diff) instead. I've made changes so that the amended commit whether we use post-review or rbt is identical, both using the standard review url. (e.g. https://reviews.apache.org/r/21545)
Bugs: MESOS-1333
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
Repository: mesos-git
Description
-------
1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
Diffs (updated)
-----
support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
Testing
-------
./support/post-reviews.py
Thanks,
Steven Phung
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 15, 2014, 6:32 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > can you run this script against a branch that has multiple commits and see if it works as expected?
>
> Steven Phung wrote:
> Just tried this out, things seem to work as expected.
Actually I think I may have found a difference with the way the review commit message is amended. Doing more testing...
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43094
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8947cd7004a939c8b9b95deaab035be928
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
> On May 15, 2014, 6:32 a.m., Vinod Kone wrote:
> > can you run this script against a branch that has multiple commits and see if it works as expected?
Just tried this out, things seem to work as expected.
- Steven
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43094
-----------------------------------------------------------
On May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8947cd7004a939c8b9b95deaab035be928
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Vinod Kone <vi...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review43094
-----------------------------------------------------------
can you run this script against a branch that has multiple commits and see if it works as expected?
- Vinod Kone
On May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> 1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> 2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8947cd7004a939c8b9b95deaab035be928
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated May 11, 2014, 7:07 p.m.)
Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone.
Bugs: MESOS-1333
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
Repository: mesos-git
Description
-------
1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
Diffs
-----
support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8947cd7004a939c8b9b95deaab035be928
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
Testing
-------
./support/post-reviews.py
Thanks,
Steven Phung
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated May 11, 2014, 3:21 p.m.)
Review request for mesos.
Changes
-------
Vinod fixed the runtime error that is first issue described in commit ad4f129cd35fc566b20b5b2826f17de50f2d3897.
Rebased my changes onto master to incorporate the rbt 0.6 revision range changes which is the second issue described.
Bugs: MESOS-1333
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
Repository: mesos-git
Description (updated)
-------
1) Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
2) Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
Diffs (updated)
-----
support/post-reviews.py 0ba14d8947cd7004a939c8b9b95deaab035be928
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
Testing
-------
./support/post-reviews.py
Thanks,
Steven Phung
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Mesos ReviewBot <de...@mesos.apache.org>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/#review42581
-----------------------------------------------------------
Patch looks great!
Reviews applied: [21257]
All tests passed.
- Mesos ReviewBot
On May 9, 2014, 7:30 a.m., Steven Phung wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated May 9, 2014, 7:30 a.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-1333
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
>
>
> Repository: mesos-git
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
>
> Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> support/post-reviews.py 2d5447b44450bf5bf1452c5b723ff95b594312eb
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> ./support/post-reviews.py
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven Phung
>
>
Re: Review Request 21257: rbt runtime error fix and updated revision range
usage for rbt 0.6+
Posted by Steven Phung <st...@gmail.com>.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Updated May 9, 2014, 7:30 a.m.)
Review request for mesos.
Bugs: MESOS-1333
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1333
Repository: mesos-git
Description
-------
Initially I was trying to use the post-reviews.py script to see if I could create a review request since I never got post review installed and figured out. When I ran the program I ran into an exception when execute was called which was because the command was accidentally passed in as two separate arguments rather than a list of two arguments.
Next, since I was using rbt 0.6 I ran into an issue where the revision range was not a supported parameter anymore since it was previously deprecated. I've updated the way the command is built and considered if we are using rbt or post-review.
Diffs
-----
support/post-reviews.py 2d5447b44450bf5bf1452c5b723ff95b594312eb
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/21257/diff/
Testing
-------
./support/post-reviews.py
Thanks,
Steven Phung