Adam Jordens@littlesquare:~/

The following is a response I got from Matt @ Cenqua regarding my recent blog on Crucible.

It is good to hear you are getting something useful out of Crucible. You mentioned that the thing you really want is “diff-based reviews”. I just want to check if that means the same thing as what we call “patch-based pre-commit reviews”.

Pre-commit reviews is going to be the very first thing we focus on once Crucible goes 1.0. At least in the first iteration, we want to ensure that you can go “svn diff > patch.txt”, upload that file into Crucible, and issue a review on that patch. Is that the kind of functionality you are after?

Please feel free to expand on what you would like to see. We will be at JavaOne again this year, if you are going to be there please drop by and say “G’day”

Thanks Matt. Patch-based pre-commit reviews, as you call them, are exactly what we’re looking for. I look forward to seeing it roll out. I see it as basically the ability to take the output from svn diff, associate it with a particular branch or trunk in the repository and schedule a review around it. Instead of launching a review from the FishEye perspective, I’d go directly to Crucible and create one there.

What impressed me the most (beyond the fact that they’re going to be working on the feature) was the speed of their response.

This isn’t a one-time thing either, what problems problems we did have with earlier versions of FishEye and Subversion were solved with a couple timely emails back and forth and the odd a beta release every so often. Well done boys!

Between Fisheye, Crucible (both from Cenqua) and JIRA, Confluence and Bamboo (all from Atlassian), we’re big fans of Australian software.

Sadly, I won’t be able to make it to JavaOne this year but for anyone that is going, swing by the Cenqua booth for a demo and t-shirt.