<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hello! The purpose of this email is to start a discussion about our code review tools. No decisions have been made about changing tools. The idea behind a timeline is so that information could be gathered in a timely manner. The Infrastructure Working Group was formed to bring together community members who have an experience and/or passion regarding infrastructure. Anyone can participate in this working group and like the LLVM Foundation, the minutes are all made public. <div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">The LLVM Foundation’s mission is to support the LLVM project and help ensure the health and productivity of of the community and this is done through numerous ways including infrastructure. I do not think it is a negative thing that the foundation board of directors would be discussing our current tools and gathering information how how well they work and how we can make them better. As the legal entity who bares financial and legal responsibility for a lot of the infrastructure, this would make sense. This also makes sense because of the people involved who care a lot about LLVM and the project. But, the LLVM Foundation does not pay for Phabricator and we are very grateful for Google’s support of this critical piece of our infrastructure. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regarding Phabricator, there are a couple of pieces of information that were provided to the LLVM Foundation by maintainers (maybe previous it sounds like) of this instance and how we may need to look into alternative ways to support it. In addition, Phacility itself has publicly stated that it is winding down operations. (<a href="https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/" class="">https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/</a>). Lastly, there are questions about why we are not using GitHub pull requests as we are on GitHub and that might be the natural path to take for a number of reasons.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The above reasons are why the RFC was written. Perhaps it wasn’t written in the best way, but I also feel like it is being read in a negative way which is incredibly disappointing given I don’t feel there is a valid reason for this.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-Tanya</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 5, 2021, at 11:35 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 at 19:16, Tom Stellard <<a href="mailto:tstellar@redhat.com" class="">tstellar@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">However, it's not a good position for the Board to be responsible<br class="">
for something that it doesn't have control over. If Google decided to stop hosting<br class="">
Phabricator for some reason (unlikely, but not impossible), the Board would be<br class="">
responsible for finding a replacement.<br class=""></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Sorry, this is a very weak reason for such a strong worded "RFC".</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I _cannot_ imagine "Google" stopping to support something so quickly as to leave the foundation without recourse. And even if they did, *no one* would blame the foundation for that.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Even if you ignore all the effort that hundreds of their engineers have done over the past decade to the project, this would hurt Google more than anyone else. It's a far fetched concern.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And if the foundation wants "control" of a piece of infrastructure that Google has been maintaining for years, then this is a different discussion. Hopefully one that doesn't involve unilateral decisions.</div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The main risk is that Phabricator is no longer maintained upstream.<br class="">
There was already an issue[1] recently where the arc tool stopped working and won't<br class="">
be fixed upstream. Using unmaintained software is a bigger risk.<br class=""></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I don't like using unmaintained software either, but I think our Phab has had more attention than the upstream project. And no one has to use arc, I certainly never have.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="">Don't get me wrong, I don't like Phab and I think Github would bring new people to the project, but it's gotta be done the right way, and pushing it isn't it.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">We, meaning the LLVM Board of Directors. And really the problem isn't the self-hosting<br class="">
so much as it's the lack of an enforceable maintenance agreement the Foundation and the<br class="">
maintainers.</blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The problem isn't self-hosting at all, given that Google is doing that. (apologies, I assumed otherwise earlier).</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Neither is maintenance, given Google is doing that too.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The only thing that's left is control, and I don't really understand why this is important, as I explained above.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">cheers,</div><div class="">--renato</div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">LLVM Developers mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br class="">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div></body></html>