-
-
reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py (Diff revision 1) Col: 80 E501 line too long (92 > 79 characters)
-
reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py (Diff revision 1) Col: 80 E501 line too long (92 > 79 characters)
On ReviewRequest "Depends On" field, show discarded dependencies with strikethrough
Review Request #7635 — Created Sept. 18, 2015 and submitted
| Information | |
|---|---|
| ynkym | |
| Review Board | |
| release-2.0.x | |
| 3758 | |
| Reviewers | |
| reviewboard | |
The "Depends On" field on review requests showed submitted
dependencies with strikethrough to indicate it is no longer
relavant, but not for discarded dependencies.Modified the html rendering for the field to also show
the discarded dependencies with strikethrough.
- Tested on local dev server.
- Passes /reviews test
| Description | From | Last Updated |
|---|---|---|
|
Col: 80 E501 line too long (92 > 79 characters) |
 reviewbot
|
|
|
Col: 80 E501 line too long (92 > 79 characters) |
reviewbot
|
|
|
In Python, you can do: if item.status in (ReviewRequest.SUBMITTED, ReviewRequest.DISCARDED): Same below. |
 chipx86
|
|
|
Not an issue on this line, actually - just a quick issue in your review request Description, but I can't … |
 mike_conley
|
-
Tool: Pyflakes Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py Tool: PEP8 Style Checker Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py
-
One quick comment about the summary and description:
We use this information directly, along with the Testing Done, to form the commit message. As such, each line needs to be < 80 characters wide. It's recommended that you compose it in your commit message and set your browser to wrap at 79 characters.
See https://www.reviewboard.org/docs/codebase/dev/writing-good-descriptions/
It's also crucial that you fill in Testing Done with as much detail as possible about every test you've ran.
-
Good fix! Small Pythonism you can take advantage of.
-
reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py (Diff revision 2) In Python, you can do:
if item.status in (ReviewRequest.SUBMITTED, ReviewRequest.DISCARDED):Same below.
YN
Change Summary:
Use Pythonic way to determine whether a dependency is in certain state.
Description: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Diff: |
Revision 3 (+4 -2) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Added Files: |
-
Tool: Pyflakes Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py Tool: PEP8 Style Checker Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py
-
-
reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py (Diff revision 3) Not an issue on this line, actually - just a quick issue in your review request Description, but I can't open an issue on that.
"revew" -> "review".
Otherwise, this looks good to me! Thanks!
YN
Change Summary:
Fixed typo in the description
Description: |
|
|---|
Tool: Pyflakes Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py Tool: PEP8 Style Checker Processed Files: reviewboard/reviews/builtin_fields.py