[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator Maintenance

Mon Jun 22 22:03:28 PDT 2020

On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 9:25 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:15 PM Mehdi AMINI via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:33 AM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:04 PM Mehdi AMINI via cfe-dev <
> cfe-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?
> >>
> >>
> >> Last time I checked, they basically said they didn't want us (no
> customizations, which LLVM folks still wanted).
> >
> >
> > Well, if this is a deal breaker for us, then we can also exclude GitHub
> PR as a replacement for now: I doubt they offer these customizations.
>
> Not sure it's necessarily quite that clear-cut. LLVM folks might want
> the customizations, but if Phab with customizations isn't maintained,
> it might be a choice between Phab without those customizations (what
> are they?)

I believe it is all there:
https://github.com/r4nt/phabricator/tree/llvm-production

As far as I know it is mostly about the interactions with the email
workflow for the *-commits@ mailing-lists, but Manuel knows best here :)

-- 
Mehdi

> or GitHub, email, etc - which might be a different
> choice/tradeoff.
>
> > What are our alternatives? (other than going back to pure email for
> reviews)
> >
> > --
> > Mehdi
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Whatever we do, we need some volunteer who's willing to spend multiple
> days on this (and potentially more going forward).
> >> I'm currently trying to find a volunteer more than solutions.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cfe-dev mailing list
> >>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200622/ed957180/attachment.html>