On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 14:35, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote: >> While I would personally love to see Rietveld declared the official >> core Python code review tool, I realize that since I wrote as a Google >> engineer and it is running on Google infrastructure (App Engine), I >> can't be fully objective about the tool choice -- even though it is >> open source, has several non-Googler maintainers, and can be run >> outside App Engine as well. > > I considered having roundup post all patches to Rietveld (trust me > that I can solve the "what branch and revision problem"). > > However, the stumbling block is access control - I don't know how > to get roundup to post to Rietveld, "anonymously", so to speak. > > So perhaps we should just run our own Rietveld instance next to Roundup. That shouldn't be too hard. Someone just has to create an App Engine project and handle the deployment. I guess the trickiest part is making sure enough people have admin access so multiple people can update the website, especially if we run a modified copy so that bugs.python.org can push "anonymous" (and probably be the only thing that can).
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4