Florian Hahn via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 02:15 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
Hi, One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for some contributors. I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my experience, the three most common uses cases are: 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit in the working directory 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I went ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. I think that could improve the experience for new contributors substantially: * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. WDYT? Cheers, Florian
David Tellenbach via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 06:09 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
Hi, although I think making the arcanist workflow more accessible is an excellent idea I'm not entirely sure if providing a custom script is the best solution (yet). A lower hanging fruit would be to have a good and comprehensive documentation, ideally including some example workflows, for using arcanist with LLVM. While the Phabricator documentation on arcanist is quite helpful for getting started it's not very detailed. Our own docs on the topic are basically non-existent. The downsides of providing a custom script are obvious: Someone has to write it and someone has to maintain it. Moreover I don't think that arcanist is so complicated that a custom script would be a huge improvement (you'd have to read the documentation of the new tool anyway). If a well organized documentation still doesn't resolve the problem of arcanist being too confusing (uncommon, ...) we could definitely think about providing a custom script, I just think it's not the first logical step. Thanks, David> On 21. Jan 2020, at 03:15, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for some contributors. > > I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my experience, the three most common uses cases are: > > 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers > 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit in the working directory > 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. > > Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I went ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . > > Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. > > I think that could improve the experience for new contributors substantially: > * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` > * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. > > WDYT? > > Cheers, > Florian > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
Martin Storsjö via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 06:44 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020, David Tellenbach via llvm-dev wrote:> The downsides of providing a custom script are obvious: Someone has to > write it and someone has to maintain it. Moreover I don't think that > arcanist is so complicated that a custom script would be a huge > improvement (you'd have to read the documentation of the new tool > anyway).To me, one upside would be if it simply would do less; if I want to apply a patch using arcanist, it will automatically change branches to apply the patch on the right base revision (or maybe just fetch the very latest master and apply it on top of that). As the llvm-project repo is fairly large, rebuilds are costly, and updating the git tree to a new version is something I want to schedule myself, not have a tool do for me behind my back when I want to try out a patch (that most probably would work just fine on my couple-days-old tree). I would much prefer a tool that simply tries to apply the change on the current branch that I happen to have checked out at the moment - essentially "git am". I've tried to look for arcanist flags to achieve this, but didn't find any when I looked. So a simple standalone tool (without the php dependency) that does less automatic stuff and just downloads and applies the patch would be great to me. Bonus points if it would set the git author field properly based on the patch author's phabricator user name/mail address. // Martin
Florian Hahn via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 07:05 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
> On Jan 20, 2020, at 22:09, David Tellenbach <david.tellenbach at me.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > although I think making the arcanist workflow more accessible is an excellent idea I'm not entirely sure if providing a custom script is the best solution (yet). > > A lower hanging fruit would be to have a good and comprehensive documentation, ideally including some example workflows, for using arcanist with LLVM. While the Phabricator documentation on arcanist is quite helpful for getting started it's not very detailed. Our own docs on the topic are basically non-existent. > > The downsides of providing a custom script are obvious: Someone has to write it and someone has to maintain it. Moreover I don't think that arcanist is so complicated that a custom script would be a huge improvement (you'd have to read the documentation of the new tool anyway). >I agree, improving the documentation will also go a long way! But there’s still the PHP issue that some people run into. Also, the script would be much more focused, which also should make —help more useful than arc’s, which shows you the 20+ different commands. To clarify, I am not proposing to get rid of arc or switching the docs to the custom script. I’d just like to highlight that writing and maintaining such a script for the most common uses cases should not be much work, in the grand scheme of things. If people are interested in collaborating on such a script, I think the burden of adding it would be quite low.
James Henderson via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 09:18 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
I like the concept, and a quick glance at the script is essentially what I'd expect, though I haven't looked at it in depth. I'm quite okay with jumping through the current hoops needed to do those three items, but they are also my most common operations, so a script would definitely simplify things for me. Unfortunately, I don't currently have the time to invest in it myself. On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 02:16, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi, > > One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions > was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for > some contributors. > > I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a > llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and > apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my > experience, the three most common uses cases are: > > 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working > directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers > 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit in > the working directory > 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working > directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. > > Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I went > ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: > reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . > > Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and > I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my > own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. > > I think that could improve the experience for new contributors > substantially: > * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` > * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. > > WDYT? > > Cheers, > Florian > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200121/69af413b/attachment.html>
Neil Henning via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 10:54 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
I'd rather we decided on whether to accept GitHub PRs or not first (in the other thread). I would bet that everyone who has troubles with arc / is not allowed to use arc would happily use GitHub PRs instead. Worst case scenario if the community decides that we don't want to accept GitHub PRs then this sort of script would be a useful time sink. Cheers, -Neil. On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:19 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> I like the concept, and a quick glance at the script is essentially what > I'd expect, though I haven't looked at it in depth. I'm quite okay with > jumping through the current hoops needed to do those three items, but they > are also my most common operations, so a script would definitely simplify > things for me. Unfortunately, I don't currently have the time to invest in > it myself. > > On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 02:16, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions >> was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for >> some contributors. >> >> I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a >> llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and >> apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my >> experience, the three most common uses cases are: >> >> 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working >> directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers >> 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit in >> the working directory >> 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working >> directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. >> >> Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I went >> ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: >> reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . >> >> Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and >> I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my >> own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. >> >> I think that could improve the experience for new contributors >> substantially: >> * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` >> * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. >> >> WDYT? >> >> Cheers, >> Florian >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-- Neil Henning Senior Software Engineer Compiler unity.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200121/cedfe1a6/attachment.html>
Zachary Turner via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 17:39 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
I went for years without using arc. The workflow was basically: 1) git format-patch -U999999 HEAD~1 2) Go to the phabricator website and click Create Patch 3) Click Browse and find the patch file that was emitted in step 1. 4) Copy/paste the description of the patch from step 1 into the box. 5) Add reviewers. It doesn't sound like the proposed script saves you all that many steps. On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 6:16 PM Florian Hahn via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi, > > One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions > was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for > some contributors. > > I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a > llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and > apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my > experience, the three most common uses cases are: > > 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working > directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers > 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit in > the working directory > 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working > directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. > > Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I went > ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: > reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . > > Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and > I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my > own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. > > I think that could improve the experience for new contributors > substantially: > * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` > * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. > > WDYT? > > Cheers, > Florian > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200121/f100b176/attachment.html>
Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-21 21:53 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
+1 to this. I will not deny that, for whatever reason, people don't seem to use Arcanist. Using PHP as the scripting language seems to be a major sticking point for people, since it is not typically preinstalled or required for normal LLVM development, in the way that Python is. I've done it, and it works for me. I think it makes more sense to try and standardize on the existing tool rather than building our own. If that means writing three docs with steps for Win, Linux, and Mac, so be it, it will cost less to maintain than something custom written against the Phab APIs. On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:09 PM David Tellenbach via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hi, > > although I think making the arcanist workflow more accessible is an > excellent idea I'm not entirely sure if providing a custom script is the > best solution (yet). > > A lower hanging fruit would be to have a good and comprehensive > documentation, ideally including some example workflows, for using arcanist > with LLVM. While the Phabricator documentation on arcanist is quite helpful > for getting started it's not very detailed. Our own docs on the topic are > basically non-existent. > > The downsides of providing a custom script are obvious: Someone has to > write it and someone has to maintain it. Moreover I don't think that > arcanist is so complicated that a custom script would be a huge improvement > (you'd have to read the documentation of the new tool anyway). > > If a well organized documentation still doesn't resolve the problem of > arcanist being too confusing (uncommon, ...) we could definitely think > about providing a custom script, I just think it's not the first logical > step. > > Thanks, > David > > > On 21. Jan 2020, at 03:15, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > One takeaway for me from the recent Phabricator vs Github PR discussions > was that arc (arcanist) can be a pain to set up and may pose a hurdle for > some contributors. > > > > I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a > llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create and > apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. In my > experience, the three most common uses cases are: > > > > 1. Create a new review from the current HEAD commit in the working > directory and let me optionally add subscribers/reviewers > > 2. Update the diff for an existing review with the current HEAD commit > in the working directory > > 3. Download the latest diff for a revision and apply it to the working > directory, using the commit message from Phabricator. > > > > Those should be fairly easy to implement and as a proof-of-concept I > went ahead and put up a patch implementing 3. from the list above: > reviews.llvm.org/D73075 . > > > > Please note that the script is probably a bit rough around the edges and > I probably won’t have time to implement 1. and 2. in the near future on my > own, but maybe someone would be interested in helping out. > > > > I think that could improve the experience for new contributors > substantially: > > * Create a new patch: `llvm-patch upload` > > * Apply a patch from a review: `llvm-patch apply D12345`. > > > > WDYT? > > > > Cheers, > > Florian > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200121/9c0ffcb5/attachment.html>
Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-23 01:38 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 09:39:10AM -0800, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev wrote:> I went for years without using arc. The workflow was basically: > > 1) git format-patch -U999999 HEAD~1 > 2) Go to the phabricator website and click Create Patch > 3) Click Browse and find the patch file that was emitted in step 1. > 4) Copy/paste the description of the patch from step 1 into the box. > 5) Add reviewers. > > It doesn't sound like the proposed script saves you all that many steps.Coming from a regular user of "hg phabsend": it sums up, especially if it can also handle updating the diff. Joerg
Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-23 01:39 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 06:15:58PM -0800, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev wrote:> I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a > llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create > and apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API.Anyone from the Mozilla community to shim in on what they are using for git users? I would hope they have a solution at hand already, hopefully not involving arcanist. Joerg
David Greene via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-23 16:52 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:> I went for years without using arc. The workflow was basically: > > 1) git format-patch -U999999 HEAD~1 > 2) Go to the phabricator website and click Create Patch > 3) Click Browse and find the patch file that was emitted in step 1. > 4) Copy/paste the description of the patch from step 1 into the box. > 5) Add reviewers. > > It doesn't sound like the proposed script saves you all that many steps.For me it's more steps because the machine where I have llvm-project checked out is not my primary browsing machine. I have to get the patch file from the remote machine to the local machine. Admittedly, it's not hard but it is extra steps. And no, things like sshfs are not allowed. -David
Florian Hahn via llvm-dev
2020-Jan-24 03:56 UTC
[llvm-dev] Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
> On 22 Jan 2020, at 17:39, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 06:15:58PM -0800, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev wrote: >> I think those points could be addressed relatively easily by adding a >> llvm-patch script (or an even better name) that allows users to create >> and apply patches from reviews.llvm.org using Phabricators API. > > Anyone from the Mozilla community to shim in on what they are using for > git users? I would hope they have a solution at hand already, hopefully > not involving arcanist.I believe someone mentioned that Mozilla has github.com/mozilla-conduit/review
Apparently Analagous Threads
- Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
- Proposing a llvm-patch helper script in-tree to create/apply patches without arc
- Unable to arc install-certificate
- Unable to arc install-certificate
- How to submit a change for code review using arc