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

[Hal Finkel via llvm-dev]

On 1/31/20 9:30 AM, David Blaikie via cfe-dev wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 6:09 AM Robinson, Paul via cfe-dev 
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     > -----Original Message-----
>     > From: cfe-dev <cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org
>     <mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>> On Behalf Of John Marshall
>     > via cfe-dev
>     > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 7:04 AM
>     > To: Jonas Devlieghere via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>     <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
>     > Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
>     >
>     > On 8 Jan 2020, Jonas Devlieghere wrote:
>     > > I believe that technically sending patches to the mailing list is
>     > > still a valid way to get your code reviewed. Not everyone
>     monitors the
>     > > mailing list actively though so that might turn out to be more
>     > > frustrating than Phabricator.
>     >
>     > I can confirm that this is indeed frustrating.
>     >
>     > I am only a user of Clang (and a former very minor contributor
>     to GCC) but
>     > I was recently sufficiently piqued by a small Clang diagnostic
>     infelicity
>     > that I looked into fixing it, and came up with what appears to this
>     > neophyte to be a trivial 2-line fix. As a first-time contributor
>     to Clang,
>     > I read the instructions for contributing at
>     > <http://clang.llvm.org/get_involved.html>:
>     >
>     >       "Clang is a subproject of the LLVM Project, but has its
>     own mailing
>     > lists because the communities have people with different
>     interests. The
>     > two clang lists are:
>     >       • cfe-commits - This list is for patch submission/discussion.
>     >       [snip]"
>     >
>     > And at
>     <https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#sending-patches> (via
>     > <http://clang.llvm.org/hacking.html#patches>: "To contribute
>     changes to
>     > Clang see LLVM's Getting Started page"):
>     >
>     >       "We don’t currently accept github pull requests, so you’ll
>     need to
>     > send patches either via emailing to llvm-commits, or,
>     preferably, via
>     > Phabricator."
>     >
>     > Having a trivial one-off patch to propose, and presented with a
>     choice of
>     > creating a Phabricator account at llvm and learning how to use it or
>     > simply sending the patch via email -- obviously I chose the
>     latter [1].
>     > It's only been 10 days but there have been no replies and around
>     2000
>     > other emails on the list since then. Of those ~2000, I noticed
>     three that
>     > were not automatically generated -- one of which was a reply to
>     another
>     > newbie, so well done Jonas Toth! [2]
>     >
>     > Apart from that one instance of a reply, it would appear that
>     99+% of the
>     > messages on cfe-commits these days are automatically generated
>     and hence
>     > that approximately zero people are actively monitoring the
>     mailing list.
>     > So it would probably be good to update the contributing
>     instructions to
>     > reflect reality.
>     >
>     >     John
>
>     I expect 99+% of the messages on cfe-commits are automatically
>     generated,
>     but that doesn't mean nobody reads the list.  I'm not the only one who
>     finds the Phabricator UI to be appallingly bad or even
>     impenetrable, for
>     anything more sophisticated than posting comments.  (I also have a
>     recipe
>     for posting new patches, learned through trial and many errors.)
>     I certainly don't use the web UI for figuring out which patches to
>     read
>     and/or comment on; I use the mailing list for that. Regretfully I
>     don't
>     do much with the Clang sub-project.
>
>     The protocol for proposed patches is effectively the same for emailed
>     patches as for Phab patches: directly CC people who would appear to be
>     appropriate reviewers, and reply with a "ping" every week or so if
>     there
>     are no responses.  This will bump the patch up in the mailing list
>     queue
>     on the list, and (one hopes) the direct CC will be noticed by
>     people who
>     don't ordinarily read the list.
>
>
> +1 to all that from me - I don't use Phab to manage my review queue - 
> I use the mailing list.


Same for me. I use the mailing list, and skim everything. However, I 
don't have time to reply to everything, so unless it's something which I 
really must follow very closely (or an email with no one cc'd, and 
obviously will need certain people cc'd), I'll wait for "ping" emails to 
see if it's something I can usefully help move along.

  -Hal


> I do skim through all the commits lists on a weekly (well, I think 
> it's been a couple of weeks now) basis & try to CC relevant people on 
> reviews if they're not something I have the time/knowledge to look at, 
> etc.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>     HTH,
>     --paulr
>
>     >
>     >
>     > [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-
>     > 20200120/302838.html
>     > [2] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-
>     > 20200127/304742.html
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > cfe-dev mailing list
>     > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>     > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>     _______________________________________________
>     cfe-dev mailing list
>     cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200131/74b1c598/attachment.html>