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

[Alex Rosenberg]

On Jul 1, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 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.

+1

I'd like single sign on for all LLVM development. We'd likely have to rehost the servers to make that possible or do some OAuth thing.

Alex


> -- 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140702/eb961010/attachment.html>