Bug fix: post-review creates unpublishable draft on submitted review requests

 






 

 


  Review Request #3085
  —
  Created April 29, 2012 and submitted 

 


















 

  

   Information

  





 
 

  bogdana
 









 
 

  RBTools
 









 
 

  
 









 
 

  2549
 









 
 

  
 






 




 

  

   Reviewers

  





 
 

  rbtools
 









 
 

  
 






 








 





  


 
 

  
This fixes Issue:2549. 
I went with the first suggestion (not allowing updates), but I can also look into re-opening the issue upon publishing, if everyone likes that option better.

 








  


 
 

  
manual
ran rbtools/tests.py (although they were mostly unrelated)

 







 









 





  








 






 
 
 

  

   

    

     
    

    
    
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
     
  • 
      
     
    • 
    

   

   

    
     

      Description
      From
      Last Updated
     

    
    



     

      
       
       
I'm not sure if this is the condition we should use. ['status'] is one of 'discarded', 'pending', or 'submitted'. I …

      		
      
       
 SM
smacleod
      
      
       
      
     




     

      
       
       
The indentation here looks a little funky to me, maybe you could try something like this: die("Review request %s is …

      		
      
       
 SM
smacleod
      
      
       
      
     




     

      
       
       
One possible tiny optimization: review_request_status = server.get_review_request(options.rid)['status'] This way you'll avoid a double dict look-up.

      		
      
       
 ME
medanat
      
      
       
      
     




     

      
       
       
Couple small syntax-related comments. The text looks nicer if the space is after "is" instead of before "not". The text …

      		
      
       chipx86chipx86
      
      
       
      
     




     

      
       
       
Can you add an instruction here that if the user really wants to update it, they can reopen the review …

      		
      
       daviddavid
      
      
       
      
     


    
   

  

 







 






  

 








 














 





 

  

   





 SM





   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
smacleod


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      rbtools/postreview.py
      


       (Diff revision 1)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    I'm not sure if this is the condition we should use.

['status'] is one of 'discarded', 'pending', or 'submitted'. I believe there is
a valid use case where you would upload a new diff to a 'discarded' request,
and then re-open it. As it stands, this change would require you to re-open
the request before uploading the diff.
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 






  3. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      rbtools/postreview.py
      


       (Diff revision 1)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    The indentation here looks a little funky to me, maybe you could try something like this:

die("Review request %s is marked as %s. Updating is" 
    "allowed only on pending requests." % (
        options.rid, review_request['status']))
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  4. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    5. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   





 BO





   

   

  

 



 















 





 

  

   





 SM





   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
smacleod


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Ship It!
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   





 ME





   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
medanat


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Looks good to me, one tiny thing.
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      rbtools/postreview.py
      


       (Diff revision 2)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    One possible tiny optimization:

review_request_status = server.get_review_request(options.rid)['status']

This way you'll avoid a double dict look-up.
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  


    1. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      You can't exactly do this since `review_request` is needed by later code. You could do:

    review_request = server.get_review_request(options.rid)
    status = review_request['status']

To be honest though, I doubt there is a measurable performance gain from this, unless
of course Python is much slower than I previously believed ;)
      
 
      

      2. 



    2. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      Yeah your solution seems more applicable.

Dict look-ups are pretty fast, but its still better style to do the same look up only once.

But you're right, its not a measurable performance hit, especially for a post-review request as this code will only run once per post-review.
      
 
      

      3. 



    3. 
 
 
      
 
      
  
 
      
 
      
  
      I agree with both of you :)
Actually, I was aware of the double look-up but decided to be lazy since, as Steve mentioned, it's not that great of a performance gain.
Still, I hope the new diff makes everyone happy :D
      
 
      

      4. 


 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   





 BO





   

   

  

 



 















 





 

  

   





 ME





   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
medanat


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Ship It!
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 





 

  

   




chipx86




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
chipx86


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      rbtools/postreview.py
      


       (Diff revision 3)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    Couple small syntax-related comments.

The text looks nicer if the space is after "is" instead of before "not". The text is nicely aligned on the left that way.

For the format parameters, the "(" should be right up against "options.rid". It can be on the following line, like:


    "blah blah" %
    (options.rid, status)
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   





 BO





   

   

  

 



 















 





 

  

   




david




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
david


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 

















  2. 
 
    
  
  
    
  
 
    
  
    
   
    
    
     
      rbtools/postreview.py
      


       (Diff revision 4)


      
     
    
    
       
   
    
     
    

    
     
    

    
     
    

       
  
    
 
    

   
    
    
    




    
 
    
  
  
  

  
  
   Show all issues
  
 
    

    



    
    Can you add an instruction here that if the user really wants to update it, they can reopen the review using the web interface?
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  3. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    4. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   





 BO





   

   

  

 



 















 





 

  

   




david




   

   







  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 
david


    
   


  

  

  



    




  1. 
 
    
  
    
   
    Ship It!
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    2. 















  2. 
 
    
  
    
   
    
  
    
 
    

 
    
  


    
 
    
 
      

  

 
    


    

 
    

    3. 




  

 
















 



 

  

   





 BO





   

   

  

 



 

  


   

   

    
 Review request changed

    
   


  

  

  






 

  Status:
  

  Closed (submitted)

  
 




 
Change Summary:

 
Pushed to master (45c6ea1). Thanks!





 


 










  

 









     

    

   

  

  

   
   Loading...