[llvm-dev] Phabricator Maintenance

Fri Jun 19 16:32:35 PDT 2020

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 4:23 PM Zachary Turner via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> I use GH daily at my current employer and i can tell you that the issues with rebasing are very real.  Unless you only use merge commits you are going to have a very bad time

Would it be practical to use merge commits during review (never
rebasing) & then rebasing/squashing to commit to the main line?
(guessing that might still make looking back at the history of the
review difficult?)

- Dave

>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:23 PM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:15 PM Keith Smiley <keithbsmiley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW GitHub's code review tools have improved significantly in the past few years. At this point with reviews and manual control over resolving / unresolving comments I think many previous complaints I've seen about GitHub vs Phabricator have been alleviated.
>>
>>
>> To be clear: this wasn't an outdated comment here, I'm using GitHub very frequently *right now* as I'm reviewing contributions to TensorFlow.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I also believe there's significant value for newcomers and casual contributors (like myself) in using the same tool as so many other major open source projects.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 13:04 Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:56 AM Hubert Tong via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:32 PM Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just my 2 cents here: we are working on enabling this as a part of
>>>>>> bugzilla migration as PRs and issues are very tied inside GitHub. Stay
>>>>>> tuned for updates!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not aware that the previous long thread about usage of GitHub PRs in place of Phabricator reviews got anywhere near the point where the option of Phabricator reviews was being dropped
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's my impression as well, I find GitHub review is frustrating in comparison to phab, in particular the way comments are handled across updates, unless you stick to never rebase and only append commits and merges from master. This is unfortunately not compatible with the LLVM repo history right now.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.phacility.com offers hosting for Phabricator, could we look into this instead?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Mehdi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> . The original post on this thread indicated interest in not maintaining Phabricator. How does that affect the availability of Phabricator? Does this mean that the community is going to move to GitHub PRs because the choice of Phabricator is being taken away?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 3:45 PM Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev
>>>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > -Chris' outdated email, +Chris' correct email :)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:01 PM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Hi folks,
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> phabricator maintenance is a topic that has been lying dormant for a while now.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> That subsequently creates a non-optimal user experience.
>>>>>> >> For me personally, given that github provides a secure PR infrastructure, the additional effort required to keep Phab going is not an investment I'm personally willing to make. I understand that there are unique selling points for Phab in its UI compared to github PRs, but there are also significant downsides in the effort to integrate with Phab that github PRs make easier.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thus, I see two options:
>>>>>> >> 1. somebody volunteers to take on Phabricator maintenance and figures out a way to fund it, either through the LLVM foundation or some other means (I'd love for us at Google to pay for it directly and give folks outside Google access, but that is unfortunately a hard problem for a variety of reasons). I'd be happy to help to provide a DB snapshot for the migration, of course.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> 2. We switch to github PRs
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Thoughts?
>>>>>> >> /Manuel
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM Raphael Isemann <teemperor at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Friendly ping
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Am Do., 9. Apr. 2020 um 16:04 Uhr schrieb Alexandre Ganea
>>>>>> >>> <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>:
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > cc Paul / MyDeveloperDay
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > De : llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> De la part de David Blaikie via llvm-dev
>>>>>> >>> > Envoyé : April 8, 2020 10:21 PM
>>>>>> >>> > À : Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann <teemperor at gmail.com>; Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
>>>>>> >>> > Cc : llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>>>>> >>> > Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] Outdated Phabricator version on reviews.llvm.org breaks Google authentication since today
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > hey Manuel - are you/do you know who's likely to be doing any upkeep on Phabricator these days? Might need an update for this...
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > - Dave
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 5:57 AM Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > Hi all,
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > I’m using my Google account to log into my Phabricator account on reviews.llvm.org . Since today that no longer works as I don’t seem to get any reply from reviews.llvm.org when I’m logged into my account. It tried logging out which fixes the issue of reviews.llvm.org not loading, but when I try to login I just get the following error:
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > > Expected to retrieve an "account" email from Google Plus API call to identify account, but failed.
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > After some searching it seems that this error is due to the Google Plus API being shutdown and the Phabricator folks replaced that logic (including this error message string) a year ago here [1]
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > I assume we haven’t updated reviews.llvm.org to whatever latest Phabricator release contains that patch.
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > Not sure who’s currently responsible for updating reviews.llvm.org so I thought I’ll just drop a mail to the list (and maybe save someone else from figuring out why their login is suddenly broken).
>>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>> >>> > [1] https://secure.phabricator.com/D20030
>>>>>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> >>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>>> >>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>>> >>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
>>>>>> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Keith Smiley
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev