[LLVMdev] Announcement: Phabricator for code reviews

Chandler Carruth chandlerc at google.com
Sat Oct 20 01:56:05 PDT 2012

On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:51 AM, David Chisnall
<David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2012, at 23:03, Owen Anderson wrote:
>> For me, the concerns are much more about privacy than about security.  I'm not really bothered by the idea of my Phabricator account being compromised, and I will use one-off credentials to ensure that a compromise of it will not impact other accounts that I care about more.
>> What does bother me is the loss of privacy implied by sharing a login system between Phabricator and any of the various OAuth providers.  I'm not interested in having my identity shared across systems, particularly when some of those systems are built for and funded by correlating as much of that identity information as possible and using it for advertising.  From this perspective, using a Github OAuth is the *least bad* alternative, but it's still not a direction that I  want to encourage.
> Completely in agreement.  Requiring a third-party login is a good reason for not using a service.

As Manuel has pointed out, there is no requirement. The process is
awkward (emailing him) but works.

I don't think the account creation or login mechanism (something that
is ancillary at best to a code review system) should be the primary
feature or constraint considered. Instead, with a workable (if
awkward) solution in hand, let's perhaps focus on whether the tool is
useful in actually doing code reviews.

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list