RE: Code Reviews

> Does anyone have any good strategies for tracking code reviews with
> subversion? I'm thinking of tagging after every code review and
> comparing between tags, but that seems excessive, any suggestions?

We're doing something similar to what Michael suggested, except it's a lot simpler to move from "draft" to "live" (to use his terms) when you use the built-in "merge" features of Subversion. This approach is called "feature branches" in the Subversion documentation: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch04s04.html#svn-ch-4-sect-4.4.2

When a contributor is done with their feature/task, they post the path to the branch and which revisions are involved. The committer will take a look at the commits in the branch and then double-check the result of merging the branch back into the trunk.

Note that, as suggested in the documentation, there's overhead in branching. We work around that by having contributors only branch when there are file operations to be performed, otherwise they can submit a patch against the trunk. Karl recently reminded us how easy it is to switch from one to another (when you realize your changes are no longer a simple patch): http://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2007-05/0739.shtml

HTH,

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Olivier Dagenais
Software Engineering / Génie logiciel
Formark - Combine the Best of SharePoint® and Livelink®
Phone: 613-599-5173 ext 238
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Make sure you don't miss anything: subscribe to the Formark Newsletter:
http://www.formark.com/support/register/index.asp
Received on Thu May 24 15:11:31 2007