[cfe-dev] [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

[David Blaikie]

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 01/07/2014 21:28, Alp Toker wrote:
>>>
>>> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the
>>> website are unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't
>>> get copied in on responses to my review comments, and rarely get any kind of
>>> direct mail with threading. You end up having to dig up historic responses
>>> in the mailing list archive which becomes tedious.
>>>
>>> Often the CC on website reviews will include arbitrary names of people
>>> who have website accounts, while excluding the actual code owners and recent
>>> committers who you'd expect would be relevant. This leads me to guess that
>>> the website is actively blocking the email addresses of LLVM developers from
>>> getting added to the CC list unless they open an account on the service.
>>
>>
>> To back this up, I get about a dozen mails a month saying "I can't find
>> you on Phabricator", to which I usually reply "Just enter my committer name
>> / email address".
>>
>>  AFAICT people rarely do that, or the site blocks the email address and
>> tries to make me create an account which I'm not planning to do at present.
>>
>> The net result is that other people else ends up CC'ed because they do
>> have an account on the website, and they attempt to review the code even
>> though someone else requested the changes. At that point it becomes a matter
>> of dealing with the fallout and things get pointlessly awkward :-/
>
>
> Btw, I'm specifically looking for others who have similar problems to Alp
> here - pretty much all other things mentioned are on my radar.

For the specific issue of threading, I don't find it problematic due
to my workflow:

All emails to the MLs get filtered to appropriate labels (GMail), any
thread with an email addressed to me is starred. So if someone replies
to a thread, but doesn't reply to me, that not a distinction my email
rules draw - it's just a thread I'm interested in, regardless.

But I totally understand that other people have other workflows that
may be more centered around replies to /them/ personally - useful when
you don't have time to read the full fire hose worth of LLVM mailing
lists.

Even then, I think the right workflow is usually to update the Phab
review, then reply to the person describing the changes. It's still
not perfect - your reply to them won't have the updated patch, it'll
be in a separate email to the list, but I usually assume that's "close
enough". But simply updating and saying "addressed the things in that
other email that was sent" is a bit too disconnected - it's valuable
to have the direct reply to the original feedback as well.

- David

>
>>
>>
>>
>> Alp.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> In fact as far as I can tell, mailing list-based developers are
>>> *completely* excluded from the CC list visible on the website. This creates
>>> a really poor workflow with responses often getting missed, and the right
>>> people not seeing patches (and conversely, it looks like people who aren't
>>> really relevant end up getting pressured into reviewing a patch in some
>>> area).
>>>
>>> Alp.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/07/2014 14:11, Manuel Klimek wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list
>>>> are not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or
>>>> whether there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely perceived
>>>> as a problem, please speak up, and I'll make sure to prioritize the fixes
>>>> (note that this is unrelated to the "lost email" problem - those are always
>>>> highest priority and as far as I'm aware we diagnosed and fixed all of them
>>>> within 1-2 business days).
>>>>
>>>> If you have the feeling that the phab email workflow makes it hard for
>>>> you to jump into reviews, keep track of reviews, or understand reviews if
>>>> you're not a phab user, please reply to this thread. You don't need to
>>>> provide details, "+1", "please fix", or "doesn't work well for me" are all
>>>> acceptable replies here - I want to get a feeling for the magnitude of the
>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> /Manuel
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.nuanti.com
>> the browser experts
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>