On 04 Feb 2015, at 09:33, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Hi Mike,
I just tried your application and it works well. Simple but effective.
One question: Could we benefit from that for daily review of Pharo fixes?
It is of course sometimes a bit hard to get to an actual URL ;-)
Good work.
Sven
On 04 Feb 2015, at 02:33, mikefilonov <mikefilonov@gmail.com> wrote:
Where you tool takes its input?
The tool requires a full URL to mcz package file for both base and target versions. This allows to compare versions on different locations. I attached the screenshot of the form :
<http://forum.world.st/file/n4803522/Monticello_Seaside_Review.png>
You may easily log in http://review.pharocloud.com/ as there is no registration and stuff (I used Mozilla Persona) so you see the form like in three clicks.
Ok I split this method into one in the superclass and one in the superclass.
This is one of the reasons why my tool requires full URL for both base and target - so it is not restricted only to ancestor comparing. With Monticello Seaside Review you can compare v43 with v46, which could be the final version of you change.
What I would love is to bind it with epicea. The users can comment the
Sorry, but I did not quite get the idea. Could you please describe a use case how Epicea is used in a development process?
Thank you, Mike
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Monticello-review-web-application-tp4803443p4803522.ht... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.