[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?

[David Greene via llvm-dev]

"Doerfert, Johannes" <jdoerfert at anl.gov> writes:

>> I still find Phab to be inscrutable.  I don't use any of its advanced
>> features.  I'm a long-time contributor.
>
> I asked a similar question in this thread in the very beginning: What
> actual problems do you have with Phab? There might be usable solutions
> out there already. The last time someone actually listed problems we got
> a lot of good responses, some of which I will try out myself.

I just posted a few I've run into over the years.

>> I can't imagine how difficult it is for folks new to the project.
>
> I am always in favor of improving the documentation. We need more
> concrete problem descriptions though.

Hopefully my post will help.

>> For all of GitHub's many flaws, its very strong advantage is that it is
>> a de facto standard.  People understand it.
>
> I do not. Arguably because I have not yet used it. However, "it is a de
> facto standard" is a weird argument for anything. People are advocating
> to move away from mailing lists towards other system though mailing
> lists are, or at least were, "de facto standard". Is the idea to keep up
> with the "de facto standard" or to improve the status quo (for group X*)?
>
> * Substitute X as you see fit.

I guess I see the goal being integrating new contributors as easy as
possible.  Now I know that many people argue that keeping existing
contributors happy is more important and I can appreciate that
viewpoint.  It is a difficult balance to strike.  I am trying to think
about solutions that lower the barrier to new contributors while letting
existing contributors still get work done, though with workflow changes.

If moving away from mailing lists makes it significantly easier for new
contributors then I will very seriously consider that.  I like e-mail
for a lot of reasons and would be sad to see it go but I'm willing to
make that sacrifice if needed to keep the project strong.

I feel like we are also discounting the possibility that GitHub can
improve.  We have evidence that they will respond to requests for
features.

IME every project eventually dies because it is no longer useful or
because it becomes too difficult to attract/integrate new contributors.
gcc almost died in the '90's and it was only because the issue was
forced via a fork that the project finally opened up to new
contributors.  I have seen projects in the private sector die because it
was too much work to teach new employees about them.  So to me,
attracting new contributors to the LLVM project is vitally important.

                       -David