Adds additional conditions to provide more options for matching reviews

Review Request #9586 — Created Feb. 5, 2018 and submitted

sholl
Review Board
master
4641
fd94cbd...
reviewboard

This enhancement allows for more control of review request matching with Integrations.

Provides the ability to match against one or more assigned reviewers or participants.

Tested locally with Slack integration.

Added unit tests.

  • 0
  • 0
  • 55
  • 0
  • 55
Description From Last Updated
Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)
flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

jcannon
  1. 
      
  2. What's the status of this? Last update was almost 5 months ago.

    Our team wants to use the Review Bot extension, but not being able to choose "Reviewer" as a condition for when a bot runs is pretty painful.

    1. Joushua,
      I am not sure why this is not getting merged in. As you mention, this was submitted a long time and it's a pretty simple change. Perhaps if some users comment on the associated ticket to show interest it will get taken care of.

      In order to use this functionality, I just applied the patch to my installed version of ReviewBoard. It's easy to do since it's editable python code. Just find the reviews/conditions.py file and add the necessary lines. On CentOS/RH for example, the file is at /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/reviewboard/reviews/conditions.py. Note that there are multiple conditions.py files, the one that needs to be patched is under reviews/

    2. I patched it on my demo server where we're trying out bots and it works like a charm. 👍

      We'd feel much more comfortable with a local patch knowing at least that the change was accepted by Review Board.

    3. Sorry, we've just been very busy.

  3. 
      
david
  1. 
      
  2. Could you add some tests for these choices in reviewboard/reviews/tests/test_conditions.py?

    1. David,

      I have added some unit tests and resolved all the issues here. Can we get this moved along now?

      Thanks!

  3. reviewboard/reviews/conditions.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     

    You can do:

    **kwargs (dict, unused):
        Unused keyword arguments.
    

    and our doc processor will understand that.

  4. reviewboard/reviews/conditions.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     

    This should be list of django.contrib.auth.models.User

  5. reviewboard/reviews/conditions.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     

    You can do:

    **kwargs (dict, unused):
        Unused keyword arguments.
    

    and our doc processor will understand that.

  6. reviewboard/reviews/conditions.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     

    This should be list of django.contrib.auth.models.User

  7. 
      
Review request changed

Change Summary:

Add unit tests.

Testing Done:

   

Tested locally with Slack integration.

  +
  +

Added unit tests.

Commit:

-4fcfe9503f0f2a9b081fb35251d78ce480ddf1e6
+73dde5093fbce134fef8402579be932a7f666603

Diff:

Revision 4 (+379 -1)

Show changes

Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)

flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

Review request changed

Change Summary:

Fix formatting issues.

Commit:

-73dde5093fbce134fef8402579be932a7f666603
+3b9ff249e595b0355ed800327b6bc0b08566640f

Diff:

Revision 5 (+429 -1)

Show changes

Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)

flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

david
  1. Ship It!
  2. 
      
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to release-3.0.x (3f16e77)
Loading...