Crucible workflow

[Sebastien Paquette]

I was wondering if there was any documentation on how to properly handle the following workflow:

- Create a review and add SVN revisions to it

- Review is done

- Author reviews comments, respond to them, makes some code changes and commits them

- ?? Add changes to review ??

- Reviewer looks at the new changes in the same crucible review

- Reviewer sends some new comments (and repeat the couple steps above until it is fine)

- Close the review

We use Jira integration and we also want to do same above with code patches sent in emails before commits...

I am having a hard time managing the ?? ?? part above on how to add the changes to a review and make this easy to do some back and forth.

I saw many documentation on this flow, but none take consider the coder making some changes..

How do you all do that? Am I doing it wrong?

Thanks

[Tini Good · Accepted solution]

We usually have the assigned Moderator ensure that the workflow we've defined is followed, the tool itself doesn't really do that.

Our process has the Author reply to each comment with an accept/reject/other decision. This gives the review team the opportunity to "discuss" the decision. Appropriate updates are made and comitted, and then the Author adds the updated changesets for reviewer(s) and moderator to confirm all corrections are made. Crucible recognizes when the file/changeset has a newer version (via Fisheye), so the Author can easily add the new version for comparison (see User Guide for Crucible 2.9 at page 72 "When Files Change During Review).

In the event a defect requires a more detailed fix, a JIRA Issue is created so the review doesn't stay open past the due date.