new command: rev[iew] [name]

[linuxcaffe]

In order to initiate a specific review mode, as configured in the rc, a new command "review" could be used, and it should match partial review names.

Without the rev[iew] command, trev should execute the review.default.

Partial name matching will allow more complex, or "orthogonal" review. consider example rc configs;

review.required-project
...
review.required-priority
...
review.old-project
...
review.old-tag

with command

trev.pl rev req

both of the "required" reviews would be run (in the order found in the rc), but with

trev.pl rev proj

both 'review.required-project' and 'review.old-project' would be run.

[nocejo]

Wouldn't be easier to ask simply for

trev required

and let trev locate, configure and run --sequentially-- every mode starting by required-

review.required-project.seltag  = ...
review.required-project.filter  = ...
...
review.required-priority.seltag = ...
review.required-priority.filter = ...
review.required-priority.lower  = ...
...

that it finds in the trevrc file? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the concept.

[linuxcaffe]

no, it's me misunderstanding! If you can use the review-name as the first argument, then there's no need for command "trev.pl review"

The salient part of the issue, is the partial match, ignore the "new command" part.

[nocejo]

Fine. I'll try it when trevrc is done.

[linuxcaffe]

non-issue

[nocejo]

What's the meaning of 'non-issue'?

[linuxcaffe]

it means it's an issue that never should have been filed :)