<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">(replying to my initial email because the thread seems to have gone off on a tangent)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A long term plan on what to do (migrate to github PRs? Something else?) is important, but let’s not get lost in the weeds: we have breakages with phabricator today. I think it’s important to not let our daily workflows degrade while we
argue about what to do next. Minimally, we could fork phabricator into the LLVM project and fix the arcanist breakage. I don’t think maintaining a fork long term is a good idea, especially since phorge exists. We should not advertise our fork as being “maintained”
to anybody, aside from the minimal goal of keeping existing workflows for LLVM functional while we decide on a migration plan.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">My personal opinion on the topic of “using phabricator vs github PRs” is to stick with phabricator. I personally prefer the “push patch sets, then merge a patch into the tree” approach to the github “fork the repo, push some changes to
your fork, then merge your fork with upstream”. I occasionally commit to CMake (which uses gitlab), and always find the experience quite confusing and awkward. I don’t know much about Phorge, but if it’s a Phabricator clone, and is actually being maintained,
it seems to me to be a good migration target. I would also personally be fine with using Gerrit.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Chris Tetreault<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Chris Tetreault via llvm-dev<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, September 30, 2021 2:54 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> MyDeveloper Day <mydeveloperday@gmail.com>; cfe-commits <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org><br>
<b>Cc:</b> llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [llvm-dev] Phabricator Creator Pulling the Plug<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p align="center" style="text-align:center"><strong><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:yellow">WARNING:</span></strong><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:yellow">
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">As I, and others have noticed, it seems that as of today, there’s some certificate issue with arcanist. (See:
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-September/153019.html">https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-September/153019.html</a>) The fix seems simple, and a PR is up, but looking through the PR activity, it seems that the PR will not
be accepted because Phabricator is no longer being maintained. It seems that arc has become the first casualty of the discontinuation of maintenance of phabricator.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I know that arc is not universally used, but I think it’s a serious blow to many people’s workflows. I think that MyDeveloperDay’s question might have just become a bit more urgent.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I suppose in the short-term, we could fork the phabricator repos in order to fix little issues like this. Alternately, we should probably stop recommending arcanist (unless we want to provide instructions on how to fix any breakages that
come along).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Chris Tetreault<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>MyDeveloper Day via llvm-dev<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, August 18, 2021 10:17 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>>; cfe-commits <<a href="mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org">cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [llvm-dev] Phabricator Creator Pulling the Plug<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p align="center" style="text-align:center"><strong><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:yellow">WARNING:</span></strong><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:yellow">
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">All<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I'm a massive fan of Phabricator, and I know there is often lots of contentious discussion about its relative merits vs github,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But unless I missed this, was there any discussion regarding the recent "Winding Down" announcement of Phabricator? and what it might mean for us in LLVM<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">See:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/">https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.phacility.com/phabricator/">https://www.phacility.com/phabricator/</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Personally I'm excited by the concept of a community driven replacement (
<a href="https://we.phorge.it/">https://we.phorge.it/</a>) . <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">epriestley did a truly amazing job, it wasn't open to public contributions. Perhaps more open development could lead to closing some of the github gaps that were of concern.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">MyDeveloperDay<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>