[cfe-dev] [analyzer] Using Phabricator Project/Group and Ponder

[Artem Dergachev via cfe-dev]

I strongly agree with Gábor.

Static analyzer is part of clang. Like, literally - we're all working on 
the same executable, the same product. We have to discuss it the way the 
rest of clang is discussed. Everybody who works on clang should be 
assumed to be interesterd in what's going on because we're potentially 
messing with their binary.

Discussing things on cfe-dev is also a nice way of informing everybody 
that we're still alive and being actively developed. This was quite 
important a few years ago when static analyzer was perceived to be a 
dead project and everybody was discouraged from working on it :)

On 7/28/20 11:02 AM, Gábor Horváth via cfe-dev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am not opposed to having an analyzer group but I would prefer to 
> keep the technical discussions on cfe-dev for the following reasons:
> - Newcomers are more likely to search/ask on cfe-dev
> - I am not sure whether we will continue to use Phabricator 
> indefinitely, there are some debates about this. While the mailing 
> list is unlikely to go away anytime soon
> - Fragmentation can be bad
> - Technical questions are never considered spam on cfe-dev (especially 
> when the discussion is tagged properly)
>
> I think, currently, one of the best ways to subscribe to analyzer 
> related patches is to watch changes to certain directories and patches 
> with certain [tag]s. I do support, however, everything that makes 
> maintaining herald rules easier.
>
> Cheers,
> Gabor
>
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 17:18, Balázs Benics via cfe-dev 
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
>     Analyzer devs, don't we want to create a *Phabricator Group*
>     <https://reviews.llvm.org/project/>?
>     Just like the Flang devs have we could also have one.
>
>     In that way, we could subscribe to all of the patches which were
>     created by one of us.
>     In case another person starts to work on the analyzer he/she just
>     joins this group and we all get subscribed to his/her patches
>     without modifying any herald rules.
>
>     By the same token, we could also benefit using *Phabricator
>     Ponder* <https://reviews.llvm.org/ponder/> for asking questions
>     relating strictly to the analyzer. So we wouldn't spam the
>     cfe-dev, and still, have some sort of searchable archive of the
>     questions and discussions.
>
>     AFAIK we stick to Phabricator for reviews regardless, so I don't
>     really see any drawbacks of using these two Phab features.
>
>     What do you think?
>     _______________________________________________
>     cfe-dev mailing list
>     cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://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/20200728/dab777bf/attachment-0001.html>