[llvm-dev] Allowing PRs on GitHub for some subprojects

Wed Mar 4 05:21:40 PST 2020

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 8:15 AM Louis Dionne via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Mar 3, 2020, at 18:48, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm one of those people ;)
>
>
> That's not something to be proud of if you expect a maintainer to commit on your behalf. If you commit yourself, then whatever.

FWIW, I'm also one of those people. ;-) I don't think that pride needs
to factor into it -- not everyone uses arc and that's okay. I push a
lot of patches on behalf of others and have only run into one
situation where it wasn't immediately obvious who to attribute a
non-arc patch to. Asking the author for how they wanted to be
attributed was painless and sufficient.

~Aaron

>
> Louis
>
>
> -eric
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:20 PM Louis Dionne via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 3, 2020, at 17:16, Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > `arc patch` should preserve the author information in the original commit, if there was any. At least it has in my experience.
>>
>> Yes, but I think people can upload raw patches to Phabricator without using `arc diff`. I know I ran into one of these just last week where I used Johannes' script (thanks!) and ended up still having to find the committer's email by other means.
>>
>> Louis
>>
>> >
>> > On 3/3/20, 1:44 PM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Louis Dionne via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Feb 20, 2020, at 14:25, Johannes Doerfert <johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 02/20, Louis Dionne via llvm-dev wrote:
>> >>> I know there has been significant discussion about "moving" from
>> >>> Phabricator to GitHub reviews and pull requests, etc. I'm not
>> >>> suggesting that we do anything in terms of global LLVM policy.
>> >>> However, as a maintainer of libc++, I commit __a lot__ of other
>> >>> people's code for them. It would be a huge time saver for me if I
>> >>> could nicely suggest to contributors (not force them) to use PRs
>> >>> instead of Phabricator for their contributions. It would also handle
>> >>> commit attribution properly, which is a pain right now.
>> >>
>> >> Don't take this as me telling you it is "actually simple". I am
>> >> interested what about the contribution is problematic? If the libc++
>> >> system doesn't have more requirements than the rest of LLVM there might
>> >> be ways to make it less painful. FWIW, here is what I do, and I know not
>> >> everyone wants to use `arc`. Ina script this could potentially reduce
>> >> the pain. Again, this is not meant to tell you it is simple or your
>> >> problems are not real.
>> >>
>> >> arc patch DXXXX
>> >> git pull --rebase origin master
>> >> arc amend
>> >> arcfilter        // see below
>> >> git llvm push master
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> arcfilter () { git log -1 --pretty=%B | awk '/Reviewers:|Subscribers:/{p=1} /Reviewed By:|Differential Revision:/{p=0} !p && !/^Summary:/' | git commit --amend -F - }
>> >
>> >    Thanks, this indeed solves some of my problems, however not entirely. When people submit contributions without an email address, I still have to do some digging to find out how to attribute the change. This shouldn't be something I even have to think about.
>> >
>> >    Louis
>> >
>> >>
>> >>> Would it be possible to allow GitHub PRs to be submitted on the
>> >>> monorepo so as to let individual sub-projects deal with it however
>> >>> they please? I've spoken to numerous people involved in libc++
>> >>> development and they would like to start submitting PRs (and for the
>> >>> others, we'll still accept Phabricator reviews). Perhaps it is
>> >>> possible to setup some kind of filter such that PRs touching only
>> >>> libcxx/ and libcxxabi/ can be submitted, but otherwise they're closed
>> >>> by the bot?
>> >>
>> >> TBH, I feel this is yet another way of splitting the community and in
>> >> the end complicating things even more. I mean, since recently if you
>> >> want to ask a question there were the *-dev lists and the IRC. Now we
>> >> have discourse, discord on top of that with some people monitoring only
>> >> one of these and others required to monitor both. Duplicating the way we
>> >> do reviews is similarly going to require people that want to be informed
>> >> to duplicate their lookups.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Johannes
>> >>
>> >
>> >    _______________________________________________
>> >    LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >    llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >    https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=hELRqZwTPoZ26mqt3iDgkwh-f8LXjZ8HNkBIKKEysGI&s=RURnqL7Gh1L4cfsZvmuLOkD0YL9PNMBiJLJ1w0ii9Yw&e=
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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