[cfe-dev] [Proposal] Automatically Cc: cfe-commits@ on Clang reviews

[Ben Hamilton via cfe-dev]

Good point, and sorry for the confusion.

Following the monorepo setup instructions
<https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-a-git-monorepo>,
diffs sent out from a monorepo will use llvm/.arcconfig
<https://reviews.llvm.org/diffusion/L/browse/llvm/trunk/.arcconfig>.

I haven't committed any changes to that .arcconfig yet, and in addition
there aren't yet any Herald rules which copy llvm-commits@ on review
requests sent out to the LLVM project.

So, that explains why llvm-commits@ was not copied on D40312.

The previous setup made sense, since review requests for clang et al were
also lumped together in the rL LLVM Diffusion repository
<https://reviews.llvm.org/diffusion/L/>, and we didn't want to subscribe
llvm-commits@ on those.

Once I land the set of commits so each project has its own Diffusion
repository (and we give it a week or so so everyone is up to date), we can
update llvm/.arcconfig to explicitly set revisions as belonging to the rL
repository, and then set up a Herald rule to subscribe llvm-commits@ on
those.

Does that help?

Ben

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:42 AM Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Ben,
> (+llvm-dev since the email I'm replying to wasn't sent there)
>
> 2017-11-21 17:18 GMT+01:00 Ben Hamilton via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>:
>
>> OK. I confirmed that Stephan's process to send out cross-repo diffs from
>> the monorepo is not affected by my proposal.
>>
>> I'm a bit late to the party, and I might just not have comprehended this
> correctly. But does your example actually work? I didn't see any email
> about D40312 on llvm-commits, shouldn't there have been one? Also, how
> would arcanist pick up two callsigns here? Wouldn't it just pick the from
> the closest surrounding .arcconfig?
>
>
>
> tl;dr: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40312 (which was sent out on top of
>> D40179 to emulate what happens with a monorepo after my proposal lands).
>>
>> Steps I took (starting with
>> https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-a-git-monorepo
>> ):
>>
>> ===
>> % git clone https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507/
>> llvm-project
>> % cd llvm-project
>> % cp llvm/.arcconfig .
>> % mkdir -p .git/info
>> % echo .arcconfig >> .git/info/exclude
>> # Manually apply D40179 into the clang-tools-extra directory
>> % arc export --revision D40179 --git | patch -d clang-tools-extra -p1
>> patching file .arcconfig
>> % git diff
>> diff --git a/clang-tools-extra/.arcconfig b/clang-tools-extra/.arcconfig
>> index f846581763e..d4a00161bce 100644
>> --- a/clang-tools-extra/.arcconfig
>> +++ b/clang-tools-extra/.arcconfig
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>  {
>> -  "project_id" : "clang-tools-extra",
>> +  "repository.callsign" : "CTE",
>>    "conduit_uri" : "https://reviews.llvm.org/"
>>  }
>>  % git commit -a -m "Differential Revision:
>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D40179"
>>  % echo "Test 1" >> llvm/README.txt
>>
>>  % echo "Test 2" >> clang-tools-extra/README.txt
>>
>>  % git commit -a -m "[Test] Monorepo test diff crossing Differential
>> repositories"
>>  % arc diff --create --reviewers sberg HEAD^
>> ===
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:00 AM Stephan Bergmann <sbergman at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/21/2017 03:41 PM, Ben Hamilton wrote:
>>> >  > My understanding was that, while there currently is no official
>>> > monorepo, it is at least possible and accepted to send single,
>>> > cross-repo patches for review.  That would no longer be possible,
>>> right?
>>> >
>>> > I assume cross-repo patches would be constructed by hand, right? Or do
>>> > you mean using the unofficial monorepo from 2016
>>> > <https://github.com/joker-eph/llvm-project>?
>>>
>>> I'm using <https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507> (as
>>> advertised at
>>> <
>>> https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-a-git-monorepo
>>> >),
>>> where such a "cross-repo diff" is just a matter of a plain 'git diff'.
>>>
>>> > An example of an existing cross-repo review in Differential would be
>>> > nice—do you happen to have one handy?
>>>
>>> I just happened to file <https://reviews.llvm.org/D40295> a moment ago,
>>> spanning clang and compiler-rt.
>>>
>>> > I think either way, we'd keep the ability to send cross-repo patches to
>>> > the top-level LLVM repo just the same way you could today.
>>> >
>>> > I'll confirm that if you can help me construct an example cross-repo
>>> > patch for review.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stephan
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20171127/d410b988/attachment.html>