[LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

[Eli Bendersky]

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

> Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are
> not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or
> whether there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely
> perceived as a problem, please speak up, and I'll make sure to prioritize
> the fixes (note that this is unrelated to the "lost email" problem - those
> are always highest priority and as far as I'm aware we diagnosed and fixed
> all of them within 1-2 business days).
>
> If you have the feeling that the phab email workflow makes it hard for you
> to jump into reviews, keep track of reviews, or understand reviews if
> you're not a phab user, please reply to this thread. You don't need to
> provide details, "+1", "please fix", or "doesn't work well for me" are all
> acceptable replies here - I want to get a feeling for the magnitude of the
> problem.
>

I have noticed, at least in some of the reviews, that replies made by email
to Phab's emails do not get into the web app. So after some time passes,
the Phab review is not useful as the sole reference to a change - one has
to fish the maillist archives for the discussion that surrounds it because
some replies were made by email.

Maybe it's a setting one has to tweak per review?

Other than that, Phab is certainly a step up from mailing patches. I think
we can all agree that all LLVM developers are acting in good faith (and
reverts are easy), and technical problems can be resolved.

 Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140701/c76cd447/attachment.html>