[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] [RFC] Deprecate email code reviews in favor of Phabricator

[Christian Kühnel via llvm-dev]

Hi Martin,

I don't mind formalizing that reviews are done on phabricator only.
> However following projects that way would, most probably, have one
> quite notable drawback compared with the current mailing list based
> approach:
>
> Right now, it's easy to distinguish between mails requiring different
> levels of attention; ones with me in the To or CC fields are more visible
> and I try to read all of them. I have personal Herald rules that CC me on
> topics that I track. But I also browse the rest of the mails (quickly
> glancing usually only) for other topics I might be interested in.
>

Having your own, custom Herald rules is always superior to general rules
for a project. They are naturally targeted towards your use cases. However
I wanted to offer a proper email integration for all users without having
to write their own rules. So the idea was to offer a "similar enough"
alternative for the XXX-commits mailing lists.

I just checked your rules [1] and you add yourself to the list of
subscribers for certain revisions. For these notifications you should be on
the "TO" section of the email, right?

 The emails going through the project [1] are sent as CC to me. There is a
ton of header attributes that could be used for filtering:

X-Phabricator-Cc: <PHID-PROJ-6nrw7h47scgenrj2njpx>

X-Herald-Rules: <74>, <368>, <665>, <667>, <671>, 700>, <576>, <615>, <770>

X-Phabricator-Stamps: actor(@bruno) application(Differential)
> author(@bruno) herald(H74) herald(H368) herald(H576) herald(H615)
> herald(H665) herald(H667) herald(H671) herald(H700) herald(H770)
> monogram(D99434) object-type(DREV) phid(PHID-DREV-6ivftbt7xso57bvmy2br)
> reviewer(@aralisza) reviewer(@delcypher) reviewer(@dvyukov)
> reviewer(@kubamracek) reviewer(@vitalybuka) reviewer(@yln)
> revision-status(needs-review) subscriber(@hoy) subscriber(@jfb)
> subscriber(@kubamracek) subscriber(@llvm-commits) subscriber(@lxfind)
> subscriber(@modimo) subscriber(@rjmccall) subscriber(@t.p.northover)
> subscriber(@wenlei) tag(#llvm) via(web)


Do you think this is good enough for filtering?

[1] https://reviews.llvm.org/H746
[2] https://reviews.llvm.org/H770


Best,
Christian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210504/d14771a5/attachment.html>