[llvm-dev] Phabricator Creator Pulling the Plug

[Brian Cain via llvm-dev]

Does something like Rust's "bors" bot satisfy the herald rules need?

re: #2 I have done this on GHE and it's mildly awkward but it does work.

And yes normalizing force pushes is the unfortunate state of GitHub PRs.
Comments are preserved. Code-anchored comments like review comments are
marked as referring to out-of-date code, IIRC.

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021, 5:56 PM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:

> We talked about this with the IWG (Infrastructure Working Group) just
> last week coincidentally.
> Two major blocking tracks that were identified at the roundtable
> during the LLVM Dev Meeting exactly 2 years ago are still an issue
> today:
>
> 1) Replacement for Herald rules. This is what allows us to subscribe
> and track new revisions or commits based on paths in the repo or other
> criteria. We could build a replacement based on GitHub action or any
> other kind of service, but this is a bit tricky (how do you store
> emails privately? etc.). I have looked around online but I didn't find
> another OSS project (or external company) providing a similar service
> for GitHub unfortunately, does anyone know of any?
>
> 2) Support for stacked commits. I can see how to structure this
> somehow assuming we would push pull-request branches in the main repo
> (with one new commit per branch and cascading the pull-requests from
> one branch to the other), otherwise this will be a major regression
> compared to the current workflow.
>
> What remains unknown to me is the current state of GitHub management
> of comments across `git commit --amend` and force push to update a
> branch.
>
> Others may have other items to add!
>
> --
> Mehdi
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 3:39 PM Brian Cain via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > How far are we from a workflow that leverages Github's Pull Requests?
> Is there some consensus that it's a desired end goal, but some features are
> missing?  Or do we prefer to use a workflow like this for the long term?
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021, 4:54 PM Chris Tetreault via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> As I, and others have noticed, it seems that as of today, there’s some
> certificate issue with arcanist. (See:
> https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-September/153019.html) The
> fix seems simple, and a PR is up, but looking through the PR activity, it
> seems that the PR will not be accepted because Phabricator is no longer
> being maintained. It seems that arc has become the first casualty of the
> discontinuation of maintenance of phabricator.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I know that arc is not universally used, but I think it’s a serious
> blow to many people’s workflows. I think that MyDeveloperDay’s question
> might have just become a bit more urgent.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I suppose in the short-term, we could fork the phabricator repos in
> order to fix little issues like this. Alternately, we should probably stop
> recommending arcanist (unless we want to provide instructions on how to fix
> any breakages that come along).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>    Chris Tetreault
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of
> MyDeveloper Day via llvm-dev
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2021 10:17 AM
> >> To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>
> >> Subject: [llvm-dev] Phabricator Creator Pulling the Plug
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary
> of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
> >>
> >> All
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm a massive fan of Phabricator, and I know there is often lots of
> contentious discussion about its relative merits vs github,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> But unless I missed this, was there any discussion regarding the recent
> "Winding Down" announcement of Phabricator? and what it might mean for us
> in LLVM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> See:
> >>
> >>
> https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/
> >>
> >> https://www.phacility.com/phabricator/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Personally I'm excited by the concept of a community driven replacement
> ( https://we.phorge.it/) .
> >>
> >> epriestley did a truly amazing job, it wasn't open to public
> contributions. Perhaps more open development could lead to closing some of
> the github gaps that were of concern.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> MyDeveloperDay
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210930/900402a1/attachment.html>