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

[Balázs Benics via cfe-dev]

OK, let's say I'm convinced about using cfe-dev for this purpose.

What about the Phab Group?

An other question is the llvm discord server.
It seems that the analyzer channel is quite - sort to say - silent.
Should we use that instead? Especially for lightweight questions and
knowlegde sharing.
If a cfe-dev quality one arises, we can still discuss that here.

What do you think about this?

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020, 21:42 Artem Dergachev <noqnoqneo at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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> 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
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing listcfe-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps://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/20200728/982bf5a7/attachment.html>