[Ns-developers] code review tool

[Gustavo Carneiro]

Hi,

I have been having problems submitting patches to codereview when behind a
company http proxy (ports 80/443 are firewalled).  Has anyone experienced
such problems, or is it just me?

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 1387, in <module>
    main()
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 1379, in main
    RealMain(sys.argv)
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 1347, in RealMain
    response_body = rpc_server.Send("/upload", body, content_type=ctype)
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 334, in Send
    self._Authenticate()
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 349, in _Authenticate
    super(HttpRpcServer, self)._Authenticate()
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 257, in _Authenticate
    auth_token = self._GetAuthToken(credentials[0], credentials[1])
  File "/home/gjc/bin/codereview-upload.py", line 201, in _GetAuthToken
    response = self.opener.open(req)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 381, in open
    response = self._open(req, data)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 399, in _open
    '_open', req)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 360, in _call_chain
    result = func(*args)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 675, in <lambda>
    meth(r, proxy, type))
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 698, in proxy_open
    return self.parent.open(req)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 387, in open
    response = meth(req, response)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 498, in http_response
    'http', request, response, code, msg, hdrs)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 425, in error
    return self._call_chain(*args)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 360, in _call_chain
    result = func(*args)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.5/urllib2.py", line 506, in http_error_default
    raise HTTPError(req.get_full_url(), code, msg, hdrs, fp)
urllib2.HTTPError: HTTP Error 400: Bad Request


2009/4/9 Mathieu Lacage <mathieu.lacage at sophia.inria.fr>

> hi,
>
> Because the number of pending code reviews is growing quickly, and email
> is a pain to deal with them, tom and I would like to get a code review
> tool up and running. A new collegue of mine, Faker looked at
> review-board.org which looks cool in a demo but is a real pain to setup
> correctly and seems to be problematic to use for our mercurial-based
> workflow.
>
> So, I would like to suggest that we use rietveld instead. I uploaded a
> sample patch: http://codereview.appspot.com/37042
> and anyone can review it if they have a google account. If you have a
> google account, you can also post new patches for review:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/new
>
> I used the upload.py script mentioned in the webpage above to create
> this test review patch:
> hg clone http://code.nsnam.org/mathieu/ns-3-simu
> cd ns-3-simu
> # edit README
> hg ci -m "test" README
> upload.py --rev=4583
>
> The above is pretty straightforward which is why I feel it would be nice
> to pick this tool and just go ahead with actually doing code reviews :)
>
> So, I would like to propose that:
> 1) we create a google group ns-3-reviews: if you want to follow through
> email code reviews, this is where you should subscribe
> 2) we ask those who submit code for review/inclusion to submit it
> through rietveld with upload.py  (I believe that the web interface will
> not work with anything but svn repositories but I would be happy to be
> proven wrong) and make sure they CC ns-3-reviews
>
> One thing some might feel concerned about is adding a dependency on an
> externally-maintained server: I personally don't feel bad about this: we
> can always install a copy of rietveld on a server of our own if we are
> unhappy about google's handling of the corereview.appspot.com server.
>
> It would be nice to hear positive or negative comments about this
> proposal.
>
> Mathieu
>
>


-- 
Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro
INESC Porto, Telecommunications and Multimedia Unit
"The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert