search for: phab

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 "...

...ting 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>` (f...

Hey, Anyone noticed that the new Phab is really really slow on mobile phones? It takes 1 or 2 seconds for any scroll to take place after a swipe, typing showing up, and something like 5 seconds for name matching or line comments to appear. The old Phab worked much better, and my phone is not that old (Nexus 5). I'm betting it'...

...e that updating a revision doesn't send email unless there is text typed into one of the boxes Manuel, but I think we should by default put some text into a box (and send the email unless the user deletes that text) when accepting a revision. Otherwise, the final LGTM can accidentally happen on Phab and not reach the mailing list (D4178 for example). Thoughts? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140627/02e483e2/attachment.html>

...t; means that it becomes hard to find and track. > > > To elaborate on the latter: > > - GitHub would not show comments in-line if it unilaterally believes that > > the comment no longer applies to the version of the code you are looking > at. > > Ok, but doesn't Phab do the same? Or does Phab attach the comment to > some potentially completely inappropriate line? The latter seems worse > to me. > Phab does the latter, but you can (1) find the comment, and (2) find its original context. The fact that it was on an older version of the code is expressed...

On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 10:47, Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote: > > I still find Phab to be inscrutable. I don't use any of its advanced > > features. I'm a long-time contributor. > > I asked a similar question in this thread in the very beginning: What > actual problems do you have with Phab? There might be usable solutions > out there already. The last...

...eople accept the patch (with LGTM or not, > doesn't matter), or we remove the restriction on closing pending > reviews. > I'm not sure why those are related - you can simply self-accept a revision (which probably shouldn't send an LG). This is because many people don't use phab, and so the LG only comes via the mailing list. > > cheers, > --renato > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140630/d0aacbe1/attachment.html>

...quot;. An "major" interface change flowing > from > > the first patch might lead only to mechanical changes that would be > > considered NFC to "status quo" of the later patches in the series. A > force > > push with GitHub would harm such a workflow, but Phabricator handles such > > use cases well. > > I have never really played with a multiple-commits-per-PR model in > GitHub so I don't know what happens with a rebase. Do all the previous > review comments disappear or something else? I would like to understand > the differen...

On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: > I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do a > normal review. Wait what? The emails I get from phab *have* an attached patch file. That was a hard requirement when we first set up Phabricator. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140703/a557db9d/attachment.html>

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 9:30 AM Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hubert, thank you so much for the detailed bisection of what I believe > is the most > problematic GitHub PR =<= Phab difference in terms of review process! > This thread has been focused on a specific aspect of the tooling / process, the thread we had two months ago mentioned another important blocker which was the support for Herald rules. It is also quite possible that there are other issues, I would be ca...

...er patches in the series depend on the changes in earlier patches. Perhaps it's my confusion in interpreting the answers. Some comments mentioned "if a review spawns a related change", which to me is a different review, and I've reviewed many of those cases. Most people use the Phab link to express relationship, but that's not a series. Others said "some patches may be approved before others" which only works in a series if they're from start to N, not N to M, nor M to the end, nor randomly approved. In this case, the series is split in two, with the latter...

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:32 AM Renato Golin via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 02:26, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > It's worth mentioning that Phabricator can read strings of the format > 'Depends on D1234' from commit messages and create those relationships for > you. > > Side note: I find that there's too many unknown features of Phab that > require manual annotations on the commit message to work. > > I don&...

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 19:10, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Can you point to examples of that - where Phab links have been used to express non-mechanically-dependent patches? Not at the top of my head, but since that's not what we're talking about, I'll go to the next point. > Approval order isn't commit order - I'm more than happy to approve a later patch in a series, even if t...

On 11/14, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > Ideally I’d even really like to have a both checking for revision on > phab, clang-formatting them, and post a comment when there is a > mismatch :) I'd like that! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pip...

GAH! Sigh.... :( That is indeed what it does. See stripQuotedText in src/applications/metamta/parser/PhabricatorMetaMTAEmailBodyParser.php if anyone's interested in hacking on php code, it looks like it might be fairly straightforward to have it strip only the lines starting with ">" after the "On ... wrote:" line. On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.nor...

Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > Granted, GitHub's UI is much "simpler" than Phab, but to my view, this > is not a problem, but a benefit. > > If we moved to GitHub PRs today, I wouldn't miss a thing. +1. I still find Phab to be inscrutable. I don't use any of its advanced features. I'm a long-time contributor. I can't imagine how difficult it is fo...

...ry, but the far majority of GitHub users know little more than the most barebone functionality of Pull Requests and the typical use case in most projects is to squash all changes. But at this point it seems clear that the real goal is to just move everything to GitHub just for the sake of it. > Phab has a very complex UI with a lot of features that people have > come to rely over the years. But it's far too complex for new people > and requires specially crafted tooling to work with. Can you at least try to make reasonable arguments without ridiculous hyperbole? Using phabricator fo...

Moving this to llvmdev - it needs a bit of a wider audience. There are several issues with phabricator, and in the current state of things there's a huge amount of confusion on how to even report problems, let alone try to resolve them. Recently I started a thread about empty emails, was directed to the phabricator project's bug tracker, and told there that LLVM has customized phabri...

...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. To back this up, I get about a dozen mails a month saying "I can't find you on Phabricator", to which I usually reply "Just enter my committer name / email address". AFAICT people rarely do that, or the site blocks the email address and tries to make me create an account which I'm not planning to do at present. The net result is that other people else ends...

Hi Manuel, I like Phabricator for code review much much more than emails. Let me know how I can help (I’m not afraid of PHP). — Mehdi > On May 27, 2015, at 3:12 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote: > > Quick update from IRC chat: > Justin (and anybody else who wants to) is going to file...