While there may be a review button link automatically created to a Rietveld code review instance for a submitted patch, there is no other indication (as far as I can tell) that of any activity on the Rietveld side including the submission of any comments there.  That seems to mean that if you are looking at an issue in the tracker, you must now periodically go to the Rietveld page to see if there is any activity there (assuming you are not on the review CC list and that the CC list is working properly).  That is far from ideal.  Many people don't need or want to be added to the nosy list or review CC list just to keep track of updates, for example, if they are monitoring activity via the mailing list archives or via something like gmane.org.  There should be some indication on the normal bug issue page that there is activity on the Rietveld side, perhaps by having Rietveld comment commits generating a message in the tracker.

+1 to a message.

Yep, came here after reviewing an issue and posting a "Reviewed" comment to suggest much the same thing. Perhaps the tracker could be included on the cc list for the post-review notification?

A message would be good.

Also if we manage to add a message to the tracker, there won't be any need to send a mail from rietveld.  That will solve #382 (the CC problems) and also make email filtering easier (I still haven't managed to set up a filter able to group the reviews with the other mails from the same issue).

Two things I think would be useful (tell me if opening other reports would be better than writing here):

- A link from the Rietveld issue to the Roundup one
- When someone writes a message on Rietveld, make them nosy on Roundup

I agree, writing a review on Rietveld should have the same effect as doing it on Roundup (i.e. new Roundup message (it doesn't need to contain all the review though), user added to nosy, mail sent to all the nosy members).
A link to Roundup would be good too.

Martin, is the process to install rietveld documented somewhere?
I don't have it on my local tracker, so I can't test things.

Ezio added the backlink from Rietveld to Roundup in r88874 \o/

The bit of code that sends the email is in rietveld/codereview/views.py:2540:_make_message and it's called by rietveld/codereview/views.py:2362:publish (note: the line numbers refer to r510, i.e. the version we are using).
A possible fix would be to:
 1) at line 2546 (after (actually, instead of) the part where the mail is sent to the cc), replace the body with something like "<user> submitted a review: <link>";
 2) send the mail to roundup;

It's also possible to create and add a new message directly to Roundup, but that's a little more involved.

> It's also possible to create and add a new message directly to Roundup, but that's a little more involved.

I hope I can work on this during the PyConDE sprints.

BTW, what version of Rietveld are you running on bugs.python.org? We've added a couple of enhancements since it was first deployed, also for API.

Rietveld now has an API that allows to query all messages for an issue -
http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/wiki/APIs However, to make a progress on
this bug, we need now two things from Martin.

> Martin, is the process to install Rietveld for documented somewhere?

It seems that it isn't, but it is at least evident that it runs through
gae2django -
http://svn.python.org/view/tracker/instances/python-dev/rietveld/ Basically,
there should not be differences in interacting with Rietveld running on
AppEngine or with gae2django version. But I remember that Roundup
integration was using some hacks to inject patches into Rietveld DB.

I propose to move all python.org specific patches for Rietveld to a
separate branch in official repository (like it currently works for
Chromium). It will be easier to sync and maintain.

> What version of Rietveld is currently deployed on python.org?