Summary

Fix problems with `rbt status-update set` and documentation.

Review Request #14056 — Created July 26, 2024 and submitted July 31, 2024, 10:17 a.m.

Information

Owner

david

Repository

RBTools

Branch

release-5.x

Bugs

Depends On

Reviewers

Groups

rbtools

People

Description

The documentation for creating reviews with rbt status-update set
indicated that body_top and body_bottom content should be set inside of
a review key in the JSON file, but the actual implementation was using
reviews. review is much more appropriate, so I've changed the
implementation to match the documentation.

This also adds issue_opened as a field for general comments in the
documentation. Because of how we create comments, any field that's valid
for the comment resource will work, but it was confusing to list
issue_opened under diff comments but not general comments.

Testing Done

Posted a review using rbt status-update set that included body top and
body bottom content, and saw that that content was properly reflected in
the rendered status update.

Commits

Summary	ID
Fix problems with `rbt status-update set` and documentation. The documentation for creating reviews with `rbt status-update set` indicated that body_top and body_bottom content should be set inside of a `review` key in the JSON file, but the actual implementation was using `reviews`. `review` is much more appropriate, so I've changed the implementation to match the documentation. This also adds `issue_opened` as a field for general comments in the documentation. Because of how we create comments, any field that's valid for the comment resource will work, but it was confusing to list `issue_opened` under diff comments but not general comments. Testing Done: Posted a review using `rbt status-update set` that included body top and body bottom content, and saw that that content was properly reflected in the rendered status update.	e89dcd9328db1f38c453b403b1ba30723bb220cb

Summary

Fix problems with `rbt status-update set` and documentation.

The documentation for creating reviews with `rbt status-update set` indicated that body_top and body_bottom content should be set inside of a `review` key in the JSON file, but the actual implementation was using `reviews`. `review` is much more appropriate, so I've changed the implementation to match the documentation. This also adds `issue_opened` as a field for general comments in the documentation. Because of how we create comments, any field that's valid for the comment resource will work, but it was confusing to list `issue_opened` under diff comments but not general comments. Testing Done: Posted a review using `rbt status-update set` that included body top and body bottom content, and saw that that content was properly reflected in the rendered status update.

e89dcd9328db1f38c453b403b1ba30723bb220cb

Issues

Description	From	Last Updated
Given the change, do we want to look for both keys, maybe deprecate the old?	chipx86	July 30, 2024, 9:48 a.m.

flake8 passed.

JSHint passed.

rbtools/commands/status_update.py (Diff revision 1)
The issue has been resolved. Show all issues
```
Given the change, do we want to look for both keys, maybe deprecate the old?
```

Commits:

	Summary	ID
	Fix problems with `rbt status-update set` and documentation. The documentation for creating reviews with `rbt status-update set` indicated that body_top and body_bottom content should be set inside of a `review` key in the JSON file, but the actual implementation was using `reviews`. `review` is much more appropriate, so I've changed the implementation to match the documentation. This also adds `issue_opened` as a field for general comments in the documentation. Because of how we create comments, any field that's valid for the comment resource will work, but it was confusing to list `issue_opened` under diff comments but not general comments. Testing Done: Posted a review using `rbt status-update set` that included body top and body bottom content, and saw that that content was properly reflected in the rendered status update.	7712dcb0c75fdea76c1dc43a1783a41a22a575bf
	Fix problems with `rbt status-update set` and documentation. The documentation for creating reviews with `rbt status-update set` indicated that body_top and body_bottom content should be set inside of a `review` key in the JSON file, but the actual implementation was using `reviews`. `review` is much more appropriate, so I've changed the implementation to match the documentation. This also adds `issue_opened` as a field for general comments in the documentation. Because of how we create comments, any field that's valid for the comment resource will work, but it was confusing to list `issue_opened` under diff comments but not general comments. Testing Done: Posted a review using `rbt status-update set` that included body top and body bottom content, and saw that that content was properly reflected in the rendered status update.	e89dcd9328db1f38c453b403b1ba30723bb220cb

Diff:

Revision 2 (+26 -8)

Show changes

	docs/rbtools/rbt/commands/status-update.rst
	rbtools/commands/status_update.py

Checks run (2 succeeded)

flake8 passed.

JSHint passed.

Ship it!

```
Ship It!
```

Status:: Completed
Change Summary:: Pushed to release-5.x (407dd64)