Jump to content


Updating review description

swarm

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 briand

briand

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 05:10 PM

One of our users that is helping us eval Swarm ran into a confusing issue with Swarm. When he first created a changelist for review, his description was something like this:

Enable cool feature


  #review @usera,userb


I noticed that Swarm did not pick up any users for the review, so I told him to change the @usera,userb and re-shelve. He changed the description to:

Enable cool feature


  #review @usera @userb


I see that the two users are now reviewers, but the description in the Swarm review has not been updated. Why? The update shows up in the history, but the description has not changed.
--
Brian

#2 P4Geoff

P4Geoff

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 217 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 05:31 PM

Brian,

I read this as two issues; both quite reasonable to report on.

1) @user,user doesn't get picked up. That's correct. To avoid false positives we tried to be conservative on what @mentions get picked up. More precisely though, we simply didn't anticipate your syntax of @user,user,user which to be honest seems quite reasonable but simply isn't presently supported.

2) Updating your local change description and reshelving/committing doesn't update the review description. This is, for what its worth, the currently intended way of operating.

We've heard requests to always update the review description and it seems a very reasonable idea.

During initial design, as you can edit the review description we were concerned updating it on shelf/commit events could lose data. That's why it presently works the way it does.

#3 P4PetrH

P4PetrH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 36 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:04 PM

Also as a side note, since 'usera,userb' is a valid username in Perforce, @usera,userb could potentially lead to an ambiguity.

#4 P4Geoff

P4Geoff

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 217 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:07 PM

View PostP4PetrH, on 17 July 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:

Also as a side note, since 'usera,userb' is a valid username in Perforce, @usera,userb could potentially lead to an ambiguity.

Ah good point Petr!

I imagine it would be rare enough that on paper we could use usera,userb if that was a literal id and if it wasn't a literal ID dig into it.
As you note; doing it properly would take some care though.

Given the moderate complexity of doing it well;  I don't imagine we'll be able to add support for the @usera,userb syntax any time soon though.

#5 briand

briand

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:17 PM

Thanks.

We have several people that are expecting the review description to update when they update the description in the changelist (which is just adding to their frustration with Swarm). In some cases, the description has changed in some significant ways and really needs to be updated in both places.

I try to avoid duplicating effort whenever practical. What are the advantages of allowing the description of the shelf and the description of the review to diverge?
--
Brian

#6 P4Geoff

P4Geoff

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 217 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:20 PM

View Postbriand, on 17 July 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

I try to avoid duplicating effort whenever practical. What are the advantages of allowing the description of the shelf and the description of the review to diverge?

Some of our users, though certainly not all, take advantage of the divergence.

If you are repeatedly updating a review, you can edit your local change description to detail the update (not the overall review) before you reshelve.
The files were updated email will include the contributing change's description and this can add context.

For example, I sometimes get a files updated email with a description akin to:
Updating based on geoff's feedback. Still working on stew's suggestions.

This adds some value to the update.


I will disclaim as time has worn on we have found people don't seem to do this as often as we expected. I think ideally the review and change descriptions would just stay in sync but its not clear when we could adjust the system to make that happen (its a bit tricky).

#7 briand

briand

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:38 PM

Thanks. I guess, for now, I need to encourage them to look at the history of the review more.
--
Brian



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: swarm

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users