[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] Phabricator Maintenance

Manuel Klimek via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jun 25 01:12:17 PDT 2020 

Mehdi, Fangrui: are you willing to take on maintenance?

Otherwise, Shoaib, the cost is currently:
~$300-350 / mo for sendgrid (300-350k emails / month)
~$2k / mo for cloud (we currently run on 1 machine O.O, plus storage &
backup)

If y'all care about the workflow but don't care about diffs in emails, we
can switch to stock phab.
I can ask Phacility for a quote; stock phab comes with significantly
different emails though.

Re: patch chains - perhaps we can ask github on support for that?
I think what would help is somebody providing a doc with the features that
phab provides that github PR doesn't, so we can get some consensus on what
the diff is.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:21 AM Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com> wrote:

> I understand that keeping this within one company is easiest from an
> organization perspective, so if Fangrui and Mehdi (and other Googlers) are
> able to take this on, that’s great. If not, I can raise this internally at
> Facebook. An estimate of the total costs incurred would be helpful for
> that, e.g. you mentioned Sendgrid being a couple of hundred dollars a month.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shoaib
>
>
>
> *From: *llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of Manuel
> Klimek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Reply-To: *Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:41 AM
> *To: *Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator Maintenance
>
>
>
> Answering multiple questions:
>
> 1. the maintenance cost (for our current setup) isn't super high, but it's
> high enough that I wasn't able to find Googlers really willing to take it
> on, and it's very bursty - I think overall, it's less than a 10% project,
> but it can eat up a day or two at unspecific times; for example, we
> currently would need a source upgrade, as I believe we have some auth
> methods not working any more.
>
> Mehdi & Fangrui, if you want to own this together, that would be the
> easiest path forward. I am happy to continue to make sure sendgrid is paid
> for (which is currently a couple hundred $ a month).
>
>
>
> 2. if I can't find Googlers willing to own this, we need to loop this
> through somebody else, which, depending on the setup, can be a bit more
> up-front work. For example, if FB was willing to take this on for the next
> 10 years ;) and you'd find a couple of folks at FB, that might be fairly
> simple, while the LLVM foundation is currently afaiu not set up to easily
> create funding even for the relatively cheap cloud setup we need
>
>
>
> 3. Mehdi is correct,
> https://github.com/r4nt/phabricator/tree/llvm-production is what's
> currently running; one of the next tasks would be to see whether we can get
> rid of more of the customizations we have (I actually have no idea how far
> we are, Eric is not on the team any more, and he's afaict been the last
> person to upgrade phab)
>
>
>
> High prio work items are:
>
> - keep the server up to date & secure
>
> - keep upgrading to newer Phab versions, reduce or maintain our diff to
> mainline
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> /Manuel
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:04 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 9:25 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:15 PM Mehdi AMINI via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:33 AM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:04 PM Mehdi AMINI via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM Hubert Tong via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:32 PM Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just my 2 cents here: we are working on enabling this as a part of
> >>>>> bugzilla migration as PRs and issues are very tied inside GitHub.
> Stay
> >>>>> tuned for updates!
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not aware that the previous long thread about usage of GitHub
> PRs in place of Phabricator reviews got anywhere near the point where the
> option of Phabricator reviews was being dropped
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That's my impression as well, I find GitHub review is frustrating in
> comparison to phab, in particular the way comments are handled across
> updates, unless you stick to never rebase and only append commits and
> merges from master. This is unfortunately not compatible with the LLVM repo
> history right now.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.phacility.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.phacility.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=9P-x7k7eVVMR4DlfgeXAq8p-1R_cVMVqOek61HN60Ho&e=>
> offers hosting for Phabricator, could we look into this instead?
> >>
> >>
> >> Last time I checked, they basically said they didn't want us (no
> customizations, which LLVM folks still wanted).
> >
> >
> > Well, if this is a deal breaker for us, then we can also exclude GitHub
> PR as a replacement for now: I doubt they offer these customizations.
>
> Not sure it's necessarily quite that clear-cut. LLVM folks might want
> the customizations, but if Phab with customizations isn't maintained,
> it might be a choice between Phab without those customizations (what
> are they?)
>
>
>
> I believe it is all there:
> https://github.com/r4nt/phabricator/tree/llvm-production
>
>
>
> As far as I know it is mostly about the interactions with the email
> workflow for the *-commits@ mailing-lists, but Manuel knows best here :)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mehdi
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> or GitHub, email, etc - which might be a different
> choice/tradeoff.
>
> > What are our alternatives? (other than going back to pure email for
> reviews)
> >
> > --
> > Mehdi
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Whatever we do, we need some volunteer who's willing to spend multiple
> days on this (and potentially more going forward).
> >> I'm currently trying to find a volunteer more than solutions.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Mehdi
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> . The original post on this thread indicated interest in not
> maintaining Phabricator. How does that affect the availability of
> Phabricator? Does this mean that the community is going to move to GitHub
> PRs because the choice of Phabricator is being taken away?
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 3:45 PM Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev
> >>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > -Chris' outdated email, +Chris' correct email :)
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:01 PM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> Hi folks,
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> phabricator maintenance is a topic that has been lying dormant
> for a while now.
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> That subsequently creates a non-optimal user experience.
> >>>>> >> For me personally, given that github provides a secure PR
> infrastructure, the additional effort required to keep Phab going is not an
> investment I'm personally willing to make. I understand that there are
> unique selling points for Phab in its UI compared to github PRs, but there
> are also significant downsides in the effort to integrate with Phab that
> github PRs make easier.
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> Thus, I see two options:
> >>>>> >> 1. somebody volunteers to take on Phabricator maintenance and
> figures out a way to fund it, either through the LLVM foundation or some
> other means (I'd love for us at Google to pay for it directly and give
> folks outside Google access, but that is unfortunately a hard problem for a
> variety of reasons). I'd be happy to help to provide a DB snapshot for the
> migration, of course.
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> 2. We switch to github PRs
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> Thoughts?
> >>>>> >> /Manuel
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM Raphael Isemann <
> teemperor at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> Friendly ping
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> Am Do., 9. Apr. 2020 um 16:04 Uhr schrieb Alexandre Ganea
> >>>>> >>> <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>:
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > cc Paul / MyDeveloperDay
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > De : llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> De la part de
> David Blaikie via llvm-dev
> >>>>> >>> > Envoyé : April 8, 2020 10:21 PM
> >>>>> >>> > À : Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann <teemperor at gmail.com>; Manuel
> Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> >>>>> >>> > Cc : llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> >>>>> >>> > Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] Outdated Phabricator version on
> reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> breaks Google authentication since today
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > hey Manuel - are you/do you know who's likely to be doing any
> upkeep on Phabricator these days? Might need an update for this...
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > - Dave
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 5:57 AM Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann via
> llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > Hi all,
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > I’m using my Google account to log into my Phabricator account
> on reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> . Since today that no longer works as I don’t seem to get any reply from
> reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> when I’m logged into my account. It tried logging out which fixes the issue
> of reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> not loading, but when I try to login I just get the following error:
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > > Expected to retrieve an "account" email from Google Plus API
> call to identify account, but failed.
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > After some searching it seems that this error is due to the
> Google Plus API being shutdown and the Phabricator folks replaced that
> logic (including this error message string) a year ago here [1]
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > I assume we haven’t updated reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> to whatever latest Phabricator release contains that patch.
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > Not sure who’s currently responsible for updating
> reviews.llvm.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__reviews.llvm.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=HAgfBPFfo9oOWhEy4OCUUP2n4iCoxmLk-StyjAbO_oo&e=>
> so I thought I’ll just drop a mail to the list (and maybe save someone else
> from figuring out why their login is suddenly broken).
> >>>>> >>> >
> >>>>> >>> > [1] https://secure.phabricator.com/D20030
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__secure.phabricator.com_D20030&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=ll1jFTtzmn4J2nolNST0I0aK1fLbo9yYSUg7mEvxBGs&e=>
> >>>>> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>>>> >>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>>> >>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>> >>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=ACUAN3fWOUwuQzLVRNc-TsqZ63HmaCGb_SL1dK04SHs&e=>
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > _______________________________________________
> >>>>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=ACUAN3fWOUwuQzLVRNc-TsqZ63HmaCGb_SL1dK04SHs&e=>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> >>>>> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State
> University
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=ACUAN3fWOUwuQzLVRNc-TsqZ63HmaCGb_SL1dK04SHs&e=>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=ACUAN3fWOUwuQzLVRNc-TsqZ63HmaCGb_SL1dK04SHs&e=>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cfe-dev mailing list
> >>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_cfe-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=f_OxOIUmWlaz5vJyYSMPQbGFoGVcDPI53yN7RhkgzIA&e=>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cfe-dev mailing list
> > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_cfe-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=lJwxc7o34UKit8nM2fj4O0ASyu1JnOqeXvhr24fX66Y&s=f_OxOIUmWlaz5vJyYSMPQbGFoGVcDPI53yN7RhkgzIA&e=>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20200625/32feac7a/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list