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

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 18:23, Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote:
> That is not what I am saying, or at least you seem to interpret it
> differently than I indented it to be read. In the part you cropped I
> mention that *both sides* provide *helpful advice* to improve the setup
> of people. I argue the problems need to be clarified for that. *Forcing
> to worsen* happens when we say we *move* but also when we *do not move*.
> Emails that just say we should move or not are therefore problematic.

So far I have seen good and bad arguments on both sides, but you keep
saying no one is providing good arguments on the other side.

It seems to me that the arguments against Phab are not a problem for
you, or you have a solution that works for you, and are therefore, not
good enough as an argument (or you need better ones).

What I'm saying is that the solutions you have may not be relevant or
good enough to them, and don't solve their problem.

In the end, both GitHub and Phab have benefits and problems, and this
will be more a choice of opinion than technical.

Trying to invalidate opinions just because they're not a big deal for
you is not helpful.

I spent many years doing code review on emails, then even more on
Phab, GitHub, Gerrit. My personal opinion is that GitHub is the least
bad in user experience, but also the simplest one, and not in the best
way. But the best part for me is that I can do almost everything from
the command line, using just plain git. That improves my productivity
immensely.

Phab is a major pain for me because I have trouble remembering all the
bells and whistles. I tried getting Arcanist to work, then it stops
working, then I have to do it all over again. The UI is super
counter-intuitive to me and even having used it for many years, it's
still alien. I make many mistakes, random ones, and that makes me
spend less time reviewing LLVM patches, not more.

It may be a problem just for me, maybe it's to do with how my brain is
wired, which granted, is a minority. That's why I have accepted it as
a fact of life to use Phab. But if there are people out there that
feel like me, then well, I'll support.

Regarding actual issues, we had enough already on both sides, I agree
with most of them, and I have already stated some myself. Tooling is
one of them, so proposing a tooling fix won't help me. i have to work
on multiple different environments, from Arch Linux, to Ubuntu, WSL
and Windows and no single tool, other than Git, can support the same
framework across the board (or at least it would be a massive job).

So, my vote is for *any* review process that I can do via Git, with
minimal use of web interfaces or specialised tools.

But I'm happy with whatever makes most people's lives easier. If
that's Phab, phab. I'll keep scratching my nails on the blackboard.

cheers,
--renato