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

Sean Silva chisophugis at gmail.com
Tue Jul 1 13:28:16 PDT 2014


On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com> wrote:

>
> On 01/07/2014 21:28, Alp Toker wrote:
>
>> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the
>> website are unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't
>> get copied in on responses to my review comments, and rarely get any kind
>> of direct mail with threading. You end up having to dig up historic
>> responses in the mailing list archive which becomes tedious.
>>
>> Often the CC on website reviews will include arbitrary names of people
>> who have website accounts, while excluding the actual code owners and
>> recent committers who you'd expect would be relevant. This leads me to
>> guess that the website is actively blocking the email addresses of LLVM
>> developers from getting added to the CC list unless they open an account on
>> the service.
>>
>
> To back this up, I get about a dozen mails a month saying "I can't find
> you on Phabricator", to which I usually reply "Just enter my committer name
> / email address".
>
>  AFAICT people rarely do that, or the site blocks the email address and
> tries to make me create an account which I'm not planning to do at present.
>

Crazy idea, but we already have an adjunct service that we all successfully
use side-by-side with the mailing lists: bugzilla. Why not have a "log in
with bugzilla credentials" option? It might be easy to implement by just
having Phab piggyback off of bugzilla's auth cookie.

-- Sean Silva


> The net result is that other people else ends up CC'ed because they do
> have an account on the website, and they attempt to review the code even
> though someone else requested the changes. At that point it becomes a
> matter of dealing with the fallout and things get pointlessly awkward :-/


>
> Alp.
>
>
>
>> In fact as far as I can tell, mailing list-based developers are
>> *completely* excluded from the CC list visible on the website. This creates
>> a really poor workflow with responses often getting missed, and the right
>> people not seeing patches (and conversely, it looks like people who aren't
>> really relevant end up getting pressured into reviewing a patch in some
>> area).
>>
>> Alp.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/07/2014 14:11, Manuel Klimek 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.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> /Manuel
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> http://www.nuanti.com
> the browser experts
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140701/b91ff12b/attachment.html>


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list