<div dir="auto">One upside of a dedicated service would be the ability to reply to threads that never made it to your inbox. Right now, if I would like to reply to something I didn't receive (such as the thread on llvm-dev, a list I didn't subscribe to, about Phab maintenance and upgrade) it's.... Well, I'd say impossible in a way that mailman picks up as a real reply.<div dir="auto">(Maybe there's a way to craft the right email headers, etc. It's not terribly important, and I also haven't given it much thought. So take "impossible" with a mine of salt.)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">However, one great upside of the mailing list is the ability to interface with it easily. Personally, I'm not very active on the list, but my biggest active streak is when I've nothing better to do and only got my phone or a low grade tablet... on both of which, accessing and writing emails is easy, but logging into arbitrary websites with potentially misbehaving mobile support, unknown ability to really save draft messages, etc... would not be convenient.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">So far I've not seen people using encrypted messages or digital signatures on mails here (unlike some other lists I'm on...) which is a great + as the email clients can properly keep the discussion threaded. (Outlook seems to flop from PGP signatures which is a constant casus belli with a colleague.)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Discord being silent isn't an issue by itself. It's a fundamentally different medium (think of an IRC on steroids with builtin logging enabled...) which people naturally use differently. It's not a system that's well-designed or meant for long term, or even "technical" discussions.</div><div dir="auto">And you also have to take into account the problems with timezones because we're an international community.</div><div dir="auto">And, when filtered for CSA *specifically*, also a very small community.</div><div dir="auto">(Another unfortunate thing with Discord is that many corporations go out of their way to prevent their people from accessing it from corporate machines...)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I think tagging messages is a good thing. I also vaguely remember mailman supporting a "per-topic subscription" sort of thing. But I've never been a mailman admin at large, so I'm not sure about how much of a configuration hell would be to set it up. </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 23:44 Balázs Benics via cfe-dev, <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>OK, let's say I'm convinced about using cfe-dev for this purpose. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">What about the Phab Group? </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">An other question is the llvm discord server. </div><div dir="auto">It seems that the analyzer channel is quite - sort to say - silent. </div><div dir="auto">Should we use that instead? Especially for lightweight questions and knowlegde sharing. </div><div dir="auto">If a cfe-dev quality one arises, we can still discuss that here. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">What do you think about this? </div><div dir="auto"><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jul 28, 2020, 21:42 Artem Dergachev <<a href="mailto:noqnoqneo@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">noqnoqneo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
I strongly agree with Gábor.<br>
<br>
Static analyzer is part of clang. Like, literally - we're all
working on the same executable, the same product. We have to discuss
it the way the rest of clang is discussed. Everybody who works on
clang should be assumed to be interesterd in what's going on because
we're potentially messing with their binary.<br>
<br>
Discussing things on cfe-dev is also a nice way of informing
everybody that we're still alive and being actively developed. This
was quite important a few years ago when static analyzer was
perceived to be a dead project and everybody was discouraged from
working on it :)<br>
<br>
<div>On 7/28/20 11:02 AM, Gábor Horváth via
cfe-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am not opposed to having an analyzer group but I would
prefer to keep the technical discussions on cfe-dev for the
following reasons:<br>
</div>
<div>- Newcomers are more likely to search/ask on cfe-dev</div>
<div>- I am not sure whether we will continue to use Phabricator
indefinitely, there are some debates about this. While the
mailing list is unlikely to go away anytime soon</div>
<div>- Fragmentation can be bad</div>
<div>- Technical questions are never considered spam on cfe-dev
(especially when the discussion is tagged properly)<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think, currently, one of the best ways to subscribe to
analyzer related patches is to watch changes to certain
directories and patches with certain [tag]s. I do support,
however, everything that makes maintaining herald rules
easier.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers,</div>
<div>Gabor<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 17:18,
Balázs Benics via cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Analyzer devs, don't we want to create a <a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/project/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"><b>Phabricator Group</b></a>?</div>
<div>Just like the Flang devs have we could also have one.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In that way, we could subscribe to all of the patches
which were created by one of us.</div>
<div>In case another person starts to work on the analyzer
he/she just joins this group and we all get subscribed to
his/her patches without modifying any herald rules.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>By the same token, we could also benefit using <a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/ponder/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"><b>Phabricator Ponder</b></a> for
asking questions relating strictly to the analyzer. So we
wouldn't spam the cfe-dev, and still, have some sort of
searchable archive of the questions and discussions.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>AFAIK we stick to Phabricator for reviews regardless,
so I don't really see any drawbacks of using these two
Phab features.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What do you think?<br>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
cfe-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
cfe-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>