Hi all, I was annoyed by the oververbose gerrit query output so I fixed
it for me.
I learned too late that David has something similar as logerrit
in the core repository. But it is in shell script, and I have written a
small query helper in python. It lists outstanding patches similar to
"git log" (it also uses less to show them). The output is like this:
The code is at git://gitorious.org/querrit/querrit.git and requires
Python3. Check it out and do ./querrit -h for help. By default it tries
to connect to host logerrit (but you can override the host with a
To test your connection do "querrit test", to do the standard query (all
open patches) simply do "querrit". To only see open patches that you
have starred, add "--qopts is:starred".
Feedback is welcome. I plan to add some config file support to be able
to configure the hostname. If I have plenty of time, I'll also add a
userfriendly "review" tool.
On Fri, 2012-06-22 at 16:03 +0200, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
> Hi all, I was annoyed by the oververbose gerrit query output so I fixed
> it for me.
Me too :-)
> I learned too late that David has something similar as logerrit
> in the core repository. But it is in shell script, and I have written a
> small query helper in python. It lists outstanding patches similar to
> "git log" (it also uses less to show them). The output is like this:
Could we not convert David's logerrit into python ? and have a single
script in more of a real programming language :-) [ shell eventually
becomes an un-maintainable / non-portable tangle IMHO ].
David - would you be ok with that ?
> The code is at git://gitorious.org/querrit/querrit.git and requires
Oh - but of course requiring the very latest python is not so cool for
general use I guess :-)
> Feedback is welcome. I plan to add some config file support to be able
> to configure the hostname. If I have plenty of time, I'll also add a
> userfriendly "review" tool.
Sounds great to me, but I'd -love- us all using, documenting, and
improving the same tooling (preferably not written in shell) ;-)
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:35:14PM +0200, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
> Hi, sorry for shameless self-plugs but I think this tool has become really
> useful now:
I love all these tooling efforts, but I really think we should coordinate them
more as changing the developer docs too often will just create frustrations on
its own. So the timeline in my head looks something like this:
- before switch: let devs learn their way around gerrit itself and only do
minor tweaks to the workflows, additional scripting can evolve "outside" the
- end of July: switch to gerrit as main repo
- end of August: hope every dev has a somewhat qualified opinion on the
available tooling/scripting sets and maybe switch to one of the gerrit
wrappers by default (updating the docs along the way and puuting it in core)
So, I hope you and David are not too disappointed, if I hope for the scripts to
foster "outside" the core-repo (at least those requiring updating the docs) for
some time. Is that ok with you?
What we urgently need "inside" the current solution is inegration of
mailinglists and IRC.