Server should handle HTTPS as part of delivered product
SB has a nice HELP page on how to get certificates and configure your SmartBear server to use secure HTTPS rather than HTTP. With both FF and Chrome now giving warnings when any password web page is not HTTPS, it's becoming a pain to field calls asking if their reviews are secure. Given the world is heading towards all pages being secure, SmartBear should consider delivering Collaborator with certificates so a secure https server would now be the default installation, rather than require IT departments to do more work...johnmcdraper6 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea2.9KViews0likes1CommentReview Pool membership visible to non-admin users
We have problems with some review pools not responding to claim a participant slot in reviews. When the reviews are created by non-admin users, they don't have any way of contacting the members of the review pool that are failing to claim the slot(s) since they have no way to determine who's even assigned to the review pool. Only an administrator can determine review pool membership, and only by opening the Admin settings and examining the group directly. Ideally the review pool name in the participant list would be a hyperlink to the page listing membership in that group. Though not strictly needed, it might also be useful to have a place where unprivileged users could look at the membership of all review pool enabled groups without having to add a review pool to a review simply to access the link to the membership page. Since some users may want review pool membership to be opaque, it might be necessary to add it as an extra option on each group to indicate whether a review pool enabled group should have visible membership.mtalexan8 years agoSenior MemberNew Idea1.7KViews0likes0CommentsReview Pool poke/email
When a review pool is added as a reviewer, we have problems with certain review pools not responding. Non-admin users cannot see the members of the review pool, and the email and poke options that are normally available from the entry in the participant list aren't available until the review pool slot is claimed. Add the ability to poke and email empty review pool slots the same as a specific user from the participant list, and send the notification to all members of the review pool.mtalexan8 years agoSenior MemberNew Idea1.7KViews0likes0CommentsAllow Reject Review setting should have additional “Administrators and Group Administrators” option
Submitted on behalf of Gadadhar Dalei (Wipro Limited).AlexeyKryuchkov8 years agoSmartBear Alumni (Retired)New Idea2.2KViews0likes0Comments"ccollab admin trigger create-review" command should return review number
Submitted on behalf of Dan Stupka (Dell). Subsequent commands should use this review number. Unfortunately, the "last" keyword doesn't return the correct review number in 100% of cases.AlexeyKryuchkov8 years agoSmartBear Alumni (Retired)New Idea1.6KViews0likes0CommentsCollaborator should support any URL scheme, not only HTTP(S)
Submitted on behalf of Gadadhar Dalei (Wipro Limited). Currently, Collaborator officially supports only the HTTP(S) URL review. It should be possible to add URLs with other schemes.AlexeyKryuchkov8 years agoSmartBear Alumni (Retired)New Idea2.3KViews0likes0CommentsAllow reviewers to download review material
The only download mechanism currently provided downloads a .diff file that attempts to show the differences in files. For Word and/or Excel files, that are much less likely to be included in a shared version control system, directly downloading a specific revision of the file itself is missing.mtalexan8 years agoSenior MemberNew Idea5.5KViews0likes2CommentsAllow directories to be excluded from file subscriptions
We have directories with a lot of of subdirectories where users need to subscribe to the majority of them, but wish to exclude some. Currently, this requires them to add every directory they need to their subscription list. It would be great if instead they could add the parent directory and then exclude specific paths beneath it. Something like this: //depot/code/** -//depot/code/python/** -//depot/code/binaries/** So you'd be notified on changes anywhere in //game/code/engine, except for files under the /python and /binaries pathslquam8 years agoNew MemberNew Idea3.3KViews0likes1CommentMatch addgitdiffs commit hash specification in the Command-line client to git commit hash specificat
The addgitdiffs command uses Git commit hash syntax identical to the git tool itself except in one regard: specifying individual commit hashes for addgitdiffs is handled the opposite of how the git tool does it. In Git syntax the following lines are identical: git diff AAAAAAA..BBBBBBB git diff AAAAAAA BBBBBBB In the Collaborator command-line client the following lines have exactly opposite meanings: ccollab addgitdiffs ask AAAAAAA..BBBBBBB ccollab addgitdiffs ask AAAAAAA BBBBBBB This seems to be because the addgitdiffs command handles the second case as a list of individual commits, which it assumes are in reverse chronological order (newest to oldest), rather than a direct pass-thru to the git tool (oldest-first) like the first command. To resolve this, split the addgitdiffs command for specifying a list of commits into a separate command (or require extra options).mtalexan8 years agoSenior Member3KViews0likes0CommentsFile permissions changes included in file reviews
File permissions can be a critical factor in files, and many Version Control systems allow creation of commits/check-ins that consist solely of file permissions changes. Request: Add the file permissions to the file differences view so they can be seen. One possible implementation might be to show the permissions settings next to the file name in the file difference view for the before and after files selected, and highlight differences.mtalexan8 years agoSenior Member2.8KViews0likes0CommentsUpdate reviewer state to Closed when Author/SME decides to close the review
We would like to havethe state updated automatically for a reviewer to closed when the Author/SME decides to close the review. Since the Author/SME has the authority to decide if a review is completed or not, a reviewer status should not be active if the review is already closed.marianpostole8 years agoMemberNew Idea2.6KViews0likes1CommentView and count those reviews that have multiple CP (change packages) associated
Would we like to request this improvement in the reports area: the possibility to view and count those reviews that have multiple CP (change packages) associated.edith_brodeala8 years agoSenior MemberNew Idea1.1KViews0likes0CommentsAllow Observers to more quickly claim Reviewer role via review pool action
Scenario: A user has set up an observer role subscription for certain files or authors. This user is also a member of a review pool group. A review comes in where the observer subscription has taken effect and that user wishes to claim the review as reviewer. The user is unable to click the Action icon to automatically become a Reviewer. User has to Edit Users -> Modify their role -> Done Editing. Proposal: Rather than require the reviewer to Edit Participants and change their role we feel that this review pool action should automatically convert a user's observer role to reviewer without it requiring a manual edit.rwilkinson8 years agoNew ContributorNew Idea5.8KViews0likes3CommentsEnable "View comparison Result" settings at Option or Project Properties.
This is the feature request for Region Checkpoint. If we want to compare two screenshots, we have to click the "View Comparison Result" button each log data. It is desirable for us to be able to enable "View Comparison Result" setting at Option or Project properties. It helps us when we have to check differences of screenshot from massive log data.Satoshi8 years agoEstablished MemberNew Idea2.4KViews0likes0CommentsInformation for iCalendar invite to be reflected to the review record
Right now, as a user, I am not able to see if the iCalendar invite have sent to the participants as there is not record of it in the Review Records. It will be nice to see that a meeting invite have been sent out and the meeting information is populated in the review record.rafCoCo8 years agoNew ContributorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0CommentsDeadline for comments to be entered
Would like the ability to set a deadline for the entire review (mainly for author) and the ability to set a deadline on when the document has to be reviewed by the reviewers and observers. Would be pretty cool if the document could be locked for comments after the reviewer deadline has passed.dlbuller8 years agoOccasional VisitorNew Idea2.4KViews0likes2CommentsWho reads these?
I'm curious what the difference is between this community 'feature request' board, and the https://support.smartbear.com 'suggestion' board. Was talking to our sales guy about some Collaborator issues, and he went to the support site and said he 'didn't see anything from me'. Which got me curious about what SmartBear engineers view more - this community board for ideas, or the support site for ideas. (And which board is more likely to see issues/suggestions fixed) Thoughts? Discussion?johnmcdraper8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea3.8KViews0likes5Comments"Return to Review" in Difference window should not disappear
I’m liking the new visual tweaks in Collaborator 11. However one things is causing issues for us. In the difference window, you have a new icon to return to the body of the review. Very nice, and more insightful. However, on smaller screens, or if you resize the screen, the Return to Review button will eventually disappear. I feel the Return to Review button should never disappear, and other buttons (such as External, Download Diff and Display) should be disappearing before the Return to Review button does. It’s causing confusion for users on smaller screens, and is just bad design in general… (Screenshots have been attached).johnmcdraper8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea2.5KViews0likes0CommentsMove “Invalidate Login Ticket” button on the Account Preferences screen.
The Settings/Preferences page is used by users and admins 99% of the time to reset passwords. However, right under the Password field is the Invalidate Login button – a button which is rarely ever used. When users go to this screen to change their passwords they are confused by the Invalidate button, leading to them getting logged off and their password not being reset. Honestly, there is no reason for the Invalidate button to be front and center like this. I suggest the Invalidate Login Ticket button be moved to the bottom of the window. For the convenience of the end users, maybe even consider putting an additional Save button right under the Password fieldjohnmcdraper8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea2.7KViews0likes2CommentsMake field mandatory by checkbox, not by Due By or other non-obvious criteria.
This issue came to my attention when I found that the Participant Custom Field Multiselect box is always mandatory. It doesn't matter if you have Due By/Visible By set to a value or not. If you are using it, it is mandatory. That is not how I want it to work. I have seen something similar on other fields where you put in validation, and it makes the field mandatory. I don't necessarily want it to be mandatory, but if it is used, it should follow a certain format. I would like to be able to specifically define if a field is mandatory or not. It could be visible and not mandatory, visible and mandatory, and it may or may not have validation or selections.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea999Views0likes0CommentsProvide error information and a way to delete error-generating change sets
I accidentally added all the 1300+ files from a branch to an ongoing review. I did this through the CC GUI, which gave no indication that the size of the change set might be a problem. When the Web UI came up, it was forever in loading mode. I let it run from Wednesday before Thanksgiving until the Monday after. I really hoped that the change set would come up so that I could use the Delete button to remove it, and allow the review to continue. No such luck. Somebody finally clued me in to an error displaying on a hidden console. This was a heap size error, so my change set was never, ever going to load. I had to re-create the review. So, my request is: Display errors on the Web UI so I know it's not just "loading..." slowly. Provide a delete button on the Web UIif a change set does generate an error. Don't let me add a change set in the CC GUIthat is not going to be able to display. Or at least warn me and ask me to confirm that I'm sure I want to take this risk. An uncaught error in a UI is never a good thing. com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:228 POST http://usdxysmrl1ms067:8080/gwt 500 (Internal Server Error)cia @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:228pv @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:317_.Gr @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-3.js:874tC @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:721U9a @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-3.js:211R9a @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-3.js:160_.Fd @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-3.js:205_.wn @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:584KS @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-5.js:424_.ee @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-3.js:151_.ge @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:172Vo @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:174_.fe @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:175aga @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:173(anonymous function) @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:890c @ com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:174 com.smartbear.ccollab.CcollabWebclient-0.js:615 Uncaught ska {e: null, f: "500 Internal Server Error Unexpected error on the …by: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space ↵", __gwt$backingJsError: Error: 500 Internal Server Error Unexpected error on the server Service method 'public abstract com.…, a: 500}marisette8 years agoNew MemberNew Idea2.5KViews0likes2CommentsFind & Highlight svn silent checkIn(s)
We are finding a solution for a specific case while connecting with SVN : How we can see the list of all those changes(in report section) which arecommitted on SVNwithout adding to changes(from Collaborator enterprise client) to reviewer?vpsinghal8 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea1KViews0likes0CommentsAbility to mass suppress/enable notifications
It would be great if there was the ability to mass suppress/enable notifications instead of one by one. thankssthmpsn8 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea2.1KViews0likes2CommentsChange default commit comment from GUI client
It would be great to be able to change what the default commit comment is when using the Collaborator GUI client to commit. We would use it to create a link to the collab review, as well as links to custom data in the review, such as bug/task ID or link. Thank you.TomThompson8 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea894Views0likes0CommentsAllow customization of review title generated from GitHub Pull Request
In our case the PR# info logged along with our JIRA# in the PR name and Collab Review# is a lot of confusing/noisy numbers and make email notification subjects too long so we'd like to be able to shorten it.cyril4j8 years agoMemberNew Idea4KViews0likes1CommentWorkflow and next phase selectors should together, at the top of the page.
Workflow and status overview is on top of the review page, but buttons to go to the next phase or wait for others are located at the bottom. From a user point very bad. My proposal would be to have the buttons both on top and at the bottom of the page. Possibly, the Next Steps box doesn't show up till the review is started, and then it is at the top of the page.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.6KViews0likes1CommentAllow some roles to edit Participant Custom Fields for the participant
Participant Custom Fields may contain information needed by others. For example, perhaps the review creator wants to have user x in a certain technical role (like "Requirements Engineer") in the review. Participant Custom Fields is great for this, except the review creator can't specify this. So, want to have participant custom fields editable by review creator and admins, and maybe a group of others (defined by a group) but I would be happy if the review creator, Moderator, and admin could set these for all participants to start.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea2KViews0likes1CommentAdd privileges/protections for review participation and visibility.
As we are using SB Collaborator for more and more reviews, there is a concern that, basically, everyone can view everything. While your dashboard only shows reviews you are personally involved with, a user via the Report tool, or just a direct URL, to view, and actually participate in, pretty much any inspection in the system. There is no check for participation or group membership or admin privileges. Basically, if you can get the URL to a review, you have full access. This is making some project leaders uncomfortable. Have there been any thoughts of introducing better protections, to restrict visibility and participation to participants; and to restrict visibility to members of groups and their group parents/children?johnmcdraper8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea4.2KViews0likes8CommentsFix the diff viewer and marker issues
We have seen cases were excel files and word files don't read correctly. We have seen where an excel file is not properly read and large portions of the file are unavailable in the diff viewer. We have seen where markers are disappearing -- the little flag is still there, but when you try to see the issue and discussion, there is an empty window. Please fix these things.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea4.4KViews0likes2CommentsCustom Reports
Hello, It will be better to have a single report for which I can add any type of field from the review, along with the specific attributes for a issue: like position, severity etc. At this moment if I want to extract the reviews created by a specific user, no matter the status, with the number issues and their severity, I can't use a single report, I need to go first on Review Currently in Progress, then on all issues. The report section is important and help us track the status for each project. Regards, Marianmarianpostole8 years agoMemberNew Idea1.2KViews0likes0CommentsPlease fix the native LOC counting
Our teams are using Synergy CM for configuration management. The LOC counting doesn't work. It shows the total LOC, but does not properly show the Added, deleted. changed lines.Please fix it.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0CommentsCustom Fields per user
We would like to have the ability to add custom fields for the users. These would be set by the user in their settings. Then, would like to have these auto-fill in the Participant Custom Fields. It should be configurable so the admin can define the fields that are filled through Settings, and also configures the association of the User Custom Field with the Participant Custom Field.MaryConti8 years agoOccasional Contributor1.1KViews0likes0CommentsP4 Protects Should Hide File Comments Along With File Content
Currently, you can use aP4 Protects script withCollaborator to prevent users from seeing file content on certain branches. This is helpful from a security point of view, but it doesn't encompass everything. File comments should also be hidden on these files as well. Without this, developers have to worry about directly addressing file contents for fear of incidentally exposing parts of the code to people who don't have access to the content.aksassu9 years agoMemberNew Idea1.4KViews0likes0CommentsMake a richer file system available for uploaded files.
When you use Client GUI to upload SCM files into a review, you get the source (SCM) file structure uploaded to a review’s Review Materials section. However, when you use the Web UI to upload files (that are NOT in CM) to a review, you are limited to a ‘flat’ file system, where ALL your files are at the top level. You can’t upload folders (or nested folders), and the Web UI doesn’t allow you to ‘create’ a folder to upload files into. Drag-and-drop will also not recognize folders dragged into a review. We have several instances where this would be useful a) General nesting, where a folder structure will match the known development structure. As in: Project > Guidance >> Algorithms.c >> exec.c > Nav >> compensation.c >> calc_V.c >Include >>comm.h >>instruments.h Documentation >requirements.docx >design.docx b) Test results, where we have several copies of the same file name, yet each is unique to where it lives. As in: Test1 > input.txt >results.txt >script.tcl Test2 > input.txt >results.txt >script.tcljohnmcdraper9 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.2KViews0likes0CommentsPreset report results at the top of the screen
When running a report (WebUI), you select your template, maybe make some configurations, then select Run. Your results are presented at the bottom of the screen, but your browser focus snaps to the results, so no real issue. However, if you save the LINK to the report and use the link another day – your focus is at the top of the screen, and not the results. You have to scroll down to see those. Sometimes scroll a lot, if you have a lot of potential report settings. This can become confusing for people who only want to see report results (Quality, Management, etc – people you don’t want to annoy :) It would be nice if report results were displayed at the top of the report page. Then the results would be immediately visible to anyone to runs the report, or recreates the report via the URL LINK. If you want to change the settings, you can scroll down and run your new report with no issue. Not a life critical change, but I’m tired of fielding the phone calls of people who use a link to see a result and instead see settings and reach for the phone before the scroll button. Plus, it would be a nicer presentation overalljohnmcdraper9 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea3KViews0likes5CommentsHome screen should not lock if there are bad reviews
Ran into an interesting bug/feature this morning. We have some reviews that are suddenly failing their integrity checks. When a review is in this state, it seems that the Home/Action Item screen (WebUI) for users who are a part of that review will never see their action screen load, even though it does contain other valid reviews. The screen jut says “loading” and will sit in that state. Would be nice if the Home/Action Item screen had some kind of flags or timeout value so that valid reviews could still be displayed. (and in a perfect world, also display the failing reviews in another color so we know something is up)johnmcdraper9 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.2KViews0likes0CommentsImprove Admin/Users experience
A few requests based on my experience with Administration/Users panel on the Web Client. I know we don’t use it often, but making it a less cumbersome experience would be helpful. 1) Allow me to set a default password for a user on the Create new User panel. Having me create a user, then have to edit that user in order to set a primary password is a pain. 2) Allow me to add a user to a group when I create the new user. Again, saving me steps during the creation process. 3) After I EDIT a user, there is no navigation panel to get me back to the users window. The left Administration panel goes away. I’m forced to use the back button a few times to get back to the Users window. Again, a bit of a pain. 4) semi related. When making a new group, there is a “Child groups of this group” setting. There is not, however, a setting for “This group is a child of” setting. I have to leave this group, go to the parent group and make new group a child. Extra steps that could be avoided.johnmcdraper9 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.1KViews0likes0CommentsProvide server version to a client
Hi there, While scripting for Collaborator administration tasks (like triggers), I was disappointed not to have an opportunity to get directly the server version from a command to the server with the ccollab utility; I was obliged to write down inside the script that reference, knowing that I will have to modify it at next server upgrade :smileysad: Thus, would it be a so big evolution to propose, in a future release, a command option (e.g. 'ccollab version' or 'ccollab admin version') that returns the server build number to the client utility? It would be a great help. Thanks! Cheers Thierrycaseatmtr68 years agoNew ContributorNew Idea2.3KViews0likes1CommentIntegrate SCM into the Web UI
Users should be able to select SCM (CVS) files for review from the Web User Interface. Everyone uses the Web UI to conduct reviews. But right now users have to use the Client GUI to get CVS files onto Collaborator. This is yet another product we need to train people on, and a separate program we have to install on each user’s PCs. SCM should be integrated into the Collaborator UI. This will concentrate the interface on one product, without additional apps installed. SCM settings could be under each user’s personal settings tab. “SCM file” could be an option under Upload. The benefit will be an integrated product with a consistent user interface.johnmcdraper9 years agoOccasional ContributorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0CommentsBetter, Automated Integration w/ GitHub Needed
Would like to see Organization level Web Hook (Web Hooks should support either an entire organization or single repository). CC currently polls all of the GitHub repositories instead causing a ‘wait time’ for reviews to be created.LMurphy9 years agoOccasional VisitorNew Idea974Views0likes0CommentsClient Maintenance - upgrade to latest version compatible with the server
The Code Collaborator client is compatible with a fairly wide range of server versions. The client is aware of the associated server. Ideally, the client tool could auto update when enabled to the current version that is compatible with the associated server version.simpleuser9 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea8.1KViews0likes4CommentsGitLab Support
Code Collaborator has support for GitHub. Ideally, this would also be available and documented for GitLab. There is some overlap between the code review in code collaborator and the pull request process. This causes additional work to use code collaborator. This opens up discussion to moving all code reviews to the code read facilities within the GitLab server to streamline the processes.simpleuser6 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea2.6KViews0likes2CommentsProvide Direct Integration for conducting a review within the IDE
Modern IDEs, such as JetBrain's IntelliJ IDEA, have a rich set of inspections and tools to aid a developer in elevating their code quality. If there was a plugin to allow the code reviewer to view and to annotatea code-based review within their IDE, the reviewerwould have a greater set of tools to aid them in reviewing the code. This would also allow thereviewer to have a greater context of the changes and their impact. I am not asking for a tool to facilitate the creation of a code review. I am asking for a plugin to conduct a code review. specifically, we would benefit from an integration with IntelliJ IDEA.simpleuser9 years agoRegular Visitor972Views0likes0Comments- PedroRomero9 years agoRegular VisitorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0Comments
Ccollab admin review-xml limitation
Ref: Case #00177750 - ccollab admin review-xml can only list the current and previous version of a TFS Changeset even though the review contains several older versions of the Changeset. This limitation reduces the usefulness of the API. In my case I simply needed to make sure if the review included the full list of changesets which was not possible. Plase add this capability. This would enable me to complete my TFS Collaborator script which I can then share with the community. Thankssinaja9 years agoNew ContributorNew Idea1.9KViews0likes0CommentsOption to set ReplyTo address as well as From: address
I am aware you can set the from address for emails sent by Collaborator. We have to have this set to a specific address to be able to relay via our mail server. internal emails are OK unauthenticated but to send externally we need to use STARTTLS, have a valid user name and password and have the from address set to an address associated with the username. SMTP Username: example\codecollab-admin Password :xxxxx Send email as User: Always use the default email address Default From Address: CodeCollaborator@example.com The address CodeCollaborator@example.com belongs to the codecollab-admin user and messages can be sent logging in with this user and sent from this address The headers from an email would look like … From: CodeCollaborator@example.com … This causes issues where a user replies to the email and it gets sent to the admin as this is the address used to send from. Due to the restrictions above we cannot use the logged in user as the from address. What would be good is to have a second option Set Reply to Address: <Always use the default email address> or <Use the users email address> This should then set the email headers as (if set to the use the users email address) … From: CodeCollaborator@example.com ReplyTo: user@example.com … When a user receives the message it will be from CodeCollaborator but if they reply it will go to user@example.comafrench9 years agoOccasional VisitorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0CommentsChange package details in web client
Is there any way to get complete information of a change package in web GUI, like configuration of sub project etc..MeghanaHK9 years agoFrequent VisitorNew Idea1.6KViews0likes0Commentscustomizable mail notifications
I would like to receive emails from Collaboratortool as soon asreviewers: 1) Approve the review 2) Re-open a defect or add a new defect This allows me to react immediately and can improve my work efficiency. When I check the settings part I find OFF / MINIMAL / ALL, which apply to all reviews. I have about 10 reviews outstanding, all in different phases, so I would like to be able to enable the above per review. It must be possible to select this for all roles (any person involved in the review that is interested in this), but mostly for the Author.krastanov9 years agoNew ContributorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0CommentsProvide support for Stash as well.
Hi all, Collaborator provide support for Github repository. As Stash is based on git as well, hence most users expect that Collaborator will have support for Stash as well. However, with latest version of Collaborator, this feature is not there. On interaction with their support team, I was informed that this feature is on their card, however they have not given specific timeline. Kindly vote this new idea up so that, request for this feature can be taken on priority. Thanks and regards, Kumar Kunal.kumar_kunal9 years agoOccasional VisitorNew Idea1.3KViews0likes0Comments