Keyboard Shortcuts

File
u :up to issue
m :publish + mail comments
M :edit review message
j / k :jump to file after / before current file
J / K :jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
Side-by-side diff
i :toggle intra-line diffs
e :expand all comments
c :collapse all comments
s :toggle showing all comments
n / p :next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :next / previous line
<Enter> :respond to / edit current comment
d :mark current comment as done
Issue
u :up to list of issues
m :publish + mail comments
j / k :jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :open current patch in side-by-side view
i :open current patch in unified diff view
Issue List
j / k :jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :open current issue
# : close issue
Comment/message editing
<Ctrl> + s or <Ctrl> + Enter :save comment
<Esc> :cancel edit
Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(325)
Issues Repositories Search
Open Issues | Closed Issues | All Issues | Sign in with your Google Account to create issues and add comments

Issue 2790041: Add an upstream issue field (closes issue #233)

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
15 years, 2 months ago by techtonik
Modified:
15 years, 2 months ago
Reviewers:
Andi Albrecht
CC:
codereview-discuss_googlegroups.com
Base URL:
http://rietveld.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/
Visibility:
Public.
This adds an upstream issue field into Issue model. It is viewable in the side panel. Demo: http://codereview-keydown.appspot.com/1/ Questions: - better interface (growth of field list overloads interface) - upload.py support - one more option and upload.py help won't fit one screen - chromium folks are using BUG=... property autolinking in issue description

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 3
Created: 15 years, 2 months ago
Download [raw] [tar.bz2]
Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+13 lines, -1 line) Patch
M app.yaml View 1 chunk +1 line, -1 line 1 comment Download
M codereview/models.py View 1 chunk +1 line, -0 lines 1 comment Download
M codereview/views.py View 4 chunks +8 lines, -0 lines 1 comment Download
M templates/issue_base.html View 1 chunk +3 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download
Total messages: 3
|
techtonik
15 years, 2 months ago (2010年10月28日 09:22:28 UTC) #1
Sign in to reply to this message.
Andi Albrecht
I'm still not sure if we really need such an field. If I understand it ...
15 years, 2 months ago (2010年10月29日 19:41:56 UTC) #2
I'm still not sure if we really need such an field. If I understand it correctly
then it's only purpose is to link back to a issue in a bug tracker or similar
system. But I'm not sure if it's enough to mention such references in the
description. Is it always 1:1? OTOH I don't see strong arguments against it,
except the UI issue and if we decide to add it then it should be added as an
option to upload.py too.
Sign in to reply to this message.
Andi Albrecht
[...and now for the comments :)] http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/app.yaml File app.yaml (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/app.yaml#newcode2 app.yaml:2: version: 31 No ...
15 years, 2 months ago (2010年10月29日 19:42:35 UTC) #3
[...and now for the comments :)]
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/app.yaml
File app.yaml (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/app.yaml#newcode2
app.yaml:2: version: 31
No need to update the version here.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/codereview/models.py
File codereview/models.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/codereview/models.py#newcode83
codereview/models.py:83: upstream = db.LinkProperty()
LinkProperty is very restrictive, at least the last time I've checked it. The
docs doesn't mention any restrictions anymore. However, IMO a StringProperty()
would be fine too. Django itself has some magic to turn this into clickable
links.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/codereview/views.py
File codereview/views.py (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/2790041/diff/1/codereview/views.py#newcode133
codereview/views.py:133: upstream = forms.URLField(required=False,
If we decide to store it as a StringProperty, this should be changed too.
Sign in to reply to this message.
|
Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /