Code Collaborator Features
Welcome to our Code Collaborator feedback site!
Do you have an idea? Do you recognize a good idea when you see one? We want to hear from you!
-
IntelliJ IDEA plugin
I'd love an IntelliJ IDEA plugin where you could submit a local changelist (group of files within a project) to Code Collaborator.
289 votesunder review ·
AdminWill West
(Developer, Code Collaborator)
responded
This got “started” as a pet project long ago, and was subsequently dropped. It looks like there is a lot of support still.
-
Add support for renamed files
Currently (at least when using SVN) when a file is renamed, the original file shows up as deleted and the new file shows up as new. The problem is that all of the bugs and comments stay with the original file (now deleted)
217 votes -
Single discussion thread covering multiple lines of code
Users want to comment on a block of code, not just an individual line of code.
177 votesplanned ·
AdminBrandon DuRette
(Admin, Code Collaborator)
responded
There are underlying technical reasons why this is tricky, so our standard answer is to just comment at the top of the block of code you are commenting on and preface with an indicator of the block that you are discussing. For example:
“This method could be…”
or
“This loop would be better if…”However, if there is overwhelming desire for this feature, it is something that we would consider adding.
-
Delete files from review
code collaborator should allow deletion of file from review, if uploaded in error by author.
Currently, author has to delete review ad recreate new review.168 votes -
Add checklist to review process
A checklist to keep track of / remind reviewers ensure the author's code is not only functionally correct but satisfies the companies coding / checkin policy. Also would be a good way to prevent recurring bugs / issues by having a way to remind reviews to check for them.
159 votes -
Source code navigation
Reviews are less effective when the execution path can not be readily followed across files (including those not changed), and symbols cannot be located. This is a serious defficiency in my opinion, leading me to jump over to an editor that supports this, and then back to the review.
153 votes -
support custom highlight rules
Please add an ability to specify additional syntax / highlight rules, for languages without builtin support. In my favorite editors, I can create a file that tells it how to highlight a new language. It would be even better if it supports an existing format for the rules (I use SlickEdit and PSPad).
150 votes -
Change status from comment to defect or vice versa.
I made a poor assumption using Smart bear for the review - I entered all my issues as comments. I have a habit of never presuming that my comments are actual problems. I had assumed that if any of my comments were deemed to be defects, the reviewer could change the status from "comment" to "defect" with relative ease. As it looks with the current implementation of Smart bear, all of my comments will need to be re-written as defects. This will take time and effort as Noah is going through it right now. It might be worthwhile to contact… more
126 votes -
Require the re-entry of the user’s password when approving a review so that it is Part 11 Compliant
Many companies could benefit from Code Collaborator being Part 11 Comliant. The tool is mostly compliant when LDAP is used. This is the only feature that would need to be added. It doesn't seem too time consuming and you can gain a lot of customers in the highly regulated industries.
123 votes -
Add native support for a "review pool"
Define any number of "pools" of reviewers, where a pool is made up of any number of users.
You can then assign reviews to a pool. Email/RSS gets sent to the members of the pool so they all have a chance to "take" the review.
On the review screen there is a "Take It!" button so it's easy for one person to claim the review.
114 votes
AdminRoy
(Admin, Code Collaborator)
responded
This feature fell out of 6.0 :-( Removing “planned” status. We would like to do this but do not have an immediate plan.
-
Add a user preference for changelist rollup setting
Would be great to be able to set a default of "roll up all changelists"
91 votes -
Reviews should stay in 'Fix Defects' until author is done.
Right now a review will get kicked out of the 'Fix Defects' phase (back to 'Inspection') if the author makes any comment on a review. This really seems like a bug in the state flow for a review. Why doesn't it stay in this state until the Author click the 'Defects Fixed; Proceed to Verification' button at the bottom of the review summary? We'd really like authors to be able to comment on defects when they fix them and after they are done forward the review back to the reviewers to re-inspect/verify. Right now my reviewers complain that they "waste"… more
78 votes -
78 votes
-
When user is subscribed to files in a review, highlight those files.
This would be particularly useful in larger reviews where each reviewer is only responsible for a small portion of the code under review.
76 votes -
Add Syntax Colouring for Delphi to the Diff Viewer
It would be great if Delphi source code (.pas files) had syntax colouring in the Diff Viewer like other languages do already.
If native support isn't possible, some kind of mechanism to create / add syntax colouring ourselves would be just as good.
70 votes -
Allow Defect Reuse - "Repeat" Defects
Sometimes, in a chunk of code, the developer repeats the same mistake in several distinct places. For example, they forget to put a header at the start of a function in several places, or they use inline strings when your coding standards are to use a home brewed string resource. It'd be nice to say 'This defect on this line is another instance of defect XXXXX" instead of repeating what was written already. This would be an "Associated" defect, or "Repeated" defect. Each defect is distinct, but each has the same root cause / bad design / problem / algorithmic… more
68 votes -
Review as Perforce Job
Others have requested ability to display p4 jobs (most often defect tickets) associated with a changelist. That's great. It would be just as good (if not better) to also create P4 jobs for every review in the system so when we submit changelists we can natively select which review it may be associated with. Without having the user to enter some regex matchable string into the comments.
67 votes -
Configurable "Wrap to Beginning" functionality
Allow the user to configure whether they want to automatically "Wrap to Beginning" when iterating through changes in a file, or stop at the end of the file.
This would be preferable to the current implementation which pops up a modal dialogue once the end of file is reached. In this case a popup dialogue does not seem necessary and disrupts the flow.
63 votes -
add server-side support for adding TFS changesets
Like you have for Perforce and Subversion now, but for TFS.
62 votes -
Allow user to choose diff view when adding a Perforce integration changelist
When you use p4addchangelist to add differences from an integration to a review, Code Collaborator shows the differences between the merged file and the source or from branch.
We would prefer to see the diffs between the target or source branch and the merge, so we can see what has actually changed on the files we want to submit.
We can upload the view we want using
"addp4diffs //depot/...@change - 1 //depot/...@change"
but this doesn't work for pending changelists, and so is not compatible with the ensure-reviewed trigger.
I don't really want to use Perforce shelving for this. Would much… more
50 votes