llvm dev - Jul 2014 - [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

On 7/1/14, 12:28 PM, Alp Toker wrote:
> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the
website are
> unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't get
copied in on
> responses to my review comments, and rarely get any kind of direct mail
with
> threading. You end up having to dig up historic responses in the mailing
list
> archive which becomes tedious.
>
> Often the CC on website reviews will include arbitrary names of people who
have
> website accounts, while excluding the actual code owners and recent
committers
> who you'd expect would be relevant. This leads me to guess that the
website is
> actively blocking the email addresses of LLVM developers from getting added
to
> the CC list unless they open an account on the service.
>
> In fact as far as I can tell, mailing list-based developers are
*completely*
> excluded from the CC list visible on the website. This creates a really
poor
> workflow with responses often getting missed, and the right people not
seeing
> patches (and conversely, it looks like people who aren't really
relevant end up
> getting pressured into reviewing a patch in some area).
+1

I've found this frustrating, especially coupled with the fact that
folks' email
addresses, phab usernames, and svn usernames are not always obviously related to
each other.

It would be nice to enforce (or very strongly suggest) a bijection on phab 
usernames and svn usernames, and then display them in the tool as something 
like: `jsmith2 "John Smith" <john at smith.com>` (for some
hypothetical developer).


Regards,
Jon
>
> Alp.
>
>
>
> On 01/07/2014 14:11, Manuel Klimek wrote:
>> Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list
are not
>> working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or
whether there
>> are more widespread problems. If this is more widely perceived as a
problem,
>> please speak up, and I'll make sure to prioritize the fixes (note
that this is
>> unrelated to the "lost email" problem - those are always
highest priority and
>> as far as I'm aware we diagnosed and fixed all of them within 1-2
business days).
>>
>> If you have the feeling that the phab email workflow makes it hard for
you to
>> jump into reviews, keep track of reviews, or understand reviews if
you're not
>> a phab user, please reply to this thread. You don't need to provide
details,
>> "+1", "please fix", or "doesn't work well
for me" are all acceptable replies
>> here - I want to get a feeling for the magnitude of the problem.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> /Manuel
>>
>
-- 
Jon Roelofs
jonathan at codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at
codesourcery.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On 7/1/14, 12:28 PM, Alp Toker wrote:
>
>> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the
>> website are
>> unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't get
>> copied in on
>> responses to my review comments, and rarely get any kind of direct mail
>> with
>> threading. You end up having to dig up historic responses in the
mailing
>> list
>> archive which becomes tedious.
>>
>> Often the CC on website reviews will include arbitrary names of people
>> who have
>> website accounts, while excluding the actual code owners and recent
>> committers
>> who you'd expect would be relevant. This leads me to guess that the
>> website is
>> actively blocking the email addresses of LLVM developers from getting
>> added to
>> the CC list unless they open an account on the service.
>>
>> In fact as far as I can tell, mailing list-based developers are
>> *completely*
>> excluded from the CC list visible on the website. This creates a really
>> poor
>> workflow with responses often getting missed, and the right people not
>> seeing
>> patches (and conversely, it looks like people who aren't really
relevant
>> end up
>> getting pressured into reviewing a patch in some area).
>>
>
> +1
>
> I've found this frustrating, especially coupled with the fact that
folks'
> email addresses, phab usernames, and svn usernames are not always obviously
> related to each other.
>
>
+1

> It would be nice to enforce (or very strongly suggest) a bijection on phab
> usernames and svn usernames, and then display them in the tool as something
> like: `jsmith2 "John Smith" <john at smith.com>` (for some
hypothetical
> developer).
>

I don't think that enforcing username conventions is the right solution
though. Personally I think the easiest and most convenient thing is to just
be able to use an email address and have phab treat that interchangeably
with the phab username (or even as the canonical name with the phab
username as a convenient alias). I think this is what bugzilla does and it
seems to work well.

Also, it would be nice if essentially everywhere that the phab username is
displayed it just used the real name. (the real name is going to end up in
the commit somehow anyway)

-- Sean Silva

>
>
> Regards,
> Jon
>
>
>
>> Alp.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/07/2014 14:11, Manuel Klimek wrote:
>>
>>> Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the
list
>>> are not
>>> working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special,
or whether
>>> there
>>> are more widespread problems. If this is more widely perceived as a
>>> problem,
>>> please speak up, and I'll make sure to prioritize the fixes
(note that
>>> this is
>>> unrelated to the "lost email" problem - those are always
highest
>>> priority and
>>> as far as I'm aware we diagnosed and fixed all of them within
1-2
>>> business days).
>>>
>>> If you have the feeling that the phab email workflow makes it hard
for
>>> you to
>>> jump into reviews, keep track of reviews, or understand reviews if
>>> you're not
>>> a phab user, please reply to this thread. You don't need to
provide
>>> details,
>>> "+1", "please fix", or "doesn't work
well for me" are all acceptable
>>> replies
>>> here - I want to get a feeling for the magnitude of the problem.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> /Manuel
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> Jon Roelofs
> jonathan at codesourcery.com
> CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140701/8b0ab467/attachment.html>

> On 2014-Jul-01, at 13:02, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at
codesourcery.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/1/14, 12:28 PM, Alp Toker wrote:
> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the
website are
> unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't get
copied in on
> responses to my review comments, and rarely get any kind of direct mail
with
> threading. You end up having to dig up historic responses in the mailing
list
> archive which becomes tedious.
> 
> Often the CC on website reviews will include arbitrary names of people who
have
> website accounts, while excluding the actual code owners and recent
committers
> who you'd expect would be relevant. This leads me to guess that the
website is
> actively blocking the email addresses of LLVM developers from getting added
to
> the CC list unless they open an account on the service.
> 
> In fact as far as I can tell, mailing list-based developers are
*completely*
> excluded from the CC list visible on the website. This creates a really
poor
> workflow with responses often getting missed, and the right people not
seeing
> patches (and conversely, it looks like people who aren't really
relevant end up
> getting pressured into reviewing a patch in some area).
> 
> +1
> 
> I've found this frustrating, especially coupled with the fact that
folks' email addresses, phab usernames, and svn usernames are not always
obviously related to each other.
> 
> 
> +1
>  
> It would be nice to enforce (or very strongly suggest) a bijection on phab
usernames and svn usernames, and then display them in the tool as something
like: `jsmith2 "John Smith" <john at smith.com>` (for some
hypothetical developer).
> 
> 
> I don't think that enforcing username conventions is the right solution
though. Personally I think the easiest and most convenient thing is to just be
able to use an email address and have phab treat that interchangeably with the
phab username (or even as the canonical name with the phab username as a
convenient alias). I think this is what bugzilla does and it seems to work well.
+1
> Also, it would be nice if essentially everywhere that the phab username is
displayed it just used the real name. (the real name is going to end up in the
commit somehow anyway)
> 
> -- Sean Silva