I manage the Fisheye+Crucible setup for a medium/large dev team and we have recently switched to using Crucible from Code Collaborator. My users are confused about the workflow for using the Defect identifier within a code review.
1. Is there anyway to have a defect create a JIRA ticket? We were told this was a function of the system when we investigated it
2. Once a defect is created, how do you resolve it? It appears that you can remove the classification but not actually acknowledge the defect as removed. This leads to either defects persisting in the review, or the flag being removed and the comments being left behind or deleted.
3. Can you prevent a review from being closed if defects are present?
4. Is there a way to get a summary of all the defects in a review?
5. When viewing a file with multiple revisions, it appears that comments are tied to a specific revision, is there anyway to have the comments appear in all revisions going forward? In other words if I make the comment in revision 5, it would not be visible in revision 4, but would be displayed for revisions 5, 6, etc. Optionally if it was always displayed that would be acceptable as well.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
1. If you have linked the Crucible Project to Jira project, directly while creating comments, an issue can be created. It gets created as a sub task of the linked issue for which the review was created
2. If a sub-task is getting created, solving of the sub-task is essentially the solving of the defect. But more than the sub-task, the reviewer could check the updated source code for the change.
3. Preventing of closing of review is not possible (i think). But since the linked Jira issue can be prevented from closing with the workflow condition (block if sub-tasks) is more than sufficient to keep the track of pending changes.
4. Yes, search of reviews and select the appropriate filter within Crucible itself, or use the Crucible gadget in a jira dashboard and it shows the aggregated summary of defects across different classifications.
5. Not possible, I assume. Eventhough it is a very good feature to have, some comments may be invalid though as newer code gets added.