Update on code review system for OpenJDK

[Martijn Verburg]

Hi all,

I've used Crucible a couple of times and quite like it.  It gives you
the ability to comment on a particular line/section of code or just
make an overall comment.  Being able to classify the comment as a
Defect, license missing etc is also very helpful.

I will say that it's UI and therefore workflow can be a little
overwhelming.  I think somebody would have to put together a "How To"
guide or the Crucible admins might be able to simplify things down
somewhat.

If JIRA is chosen as the issue tracker, then Crucible is a nice
tie-in.  I found being able to jump from the JIRA issue to the code
review and back again was really useful, especially if I was not
intimately familiar with the code.

Cheers,
Martijn

On 27 May 2011 17:19, Ulf Zibis <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de> wrote:
> Additional Points:
> - Usability on Windows
> The current webrev script is practically unusable on Windows. 1., making it
> to run via Cygwin is not quite easy, 2. needs incredible performance and 3.
> it crashes by stack overflow, if more than ~8 files are involved.
>
> - Performance for creating a WebRev
> The current webrev script needs much performance.
>
> -Ulf
>
>
> Am 27.05.2011 17:29, schrieb Mohan Pakkurti:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In april I posted a request for use cases and features for a code review
>> system for OpenJDK.
>>
>> I have aggregated the many enthusiastic replies received in response, and
>> did a comparison of Review Board and Crucible.
>>
>> Here are some preliminary findings from the comparison:
>>
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mo/openjdk/codereview/ReviewboardCrucibleComparison.pdf
>>
>> Let me know if there are any more requirements you want to add to this
>> list. If you have experience using these systems, please do share your
>> impressions about these tools.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Mohan
>>
>>
>