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

Thu Jun 25 09:28:20 PDT 2020

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 1:12 AM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

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

Sure, let's work out a transition plan offline!

>
> 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.
>

I think it is a flat $12k/year above 50 users? (see:
https://www.phacility.com/pricing/ )

>
> 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.
>

Indeed, I'll try to start a doc on this.

>
> 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/d9b0139c/attachment-0001.html>