Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "Phabricator "buildable" indication"
2017 Nov 09
2
Phabricator "buildable" indication
Hi All,
I just posted a review with arcanist (which I'm fairly new to) and it
included a build status. How it got there is totally opaque to me, but my
workflow was: Using git+svn (following the setup in
https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-git-svn)
make a change, commit with 'git commit', create review with 'air diff'.
It would be cool if
2020 Apr 09
3
Delete Phabricator metadata tags before committing
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 10:29 AM Michael Kruse <llvmdev at meinersbur.de> wrote:
> I was always assuming that the suggested commit is assembled in the
> PHP code run by arcanist command run locally. If indeed the arc
> command requests the commit message from the server,
I assumed so too until I went digging for it. Seems the client-side stuff
only deals with the structured data,
2020 Jan 08
5
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
> On Jan 7, 2020, at 17:35, Jonas Devlieghere via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM Bill Wendling via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Bill,
>>>
>>> On 01/07, Bill
2020 Jan 08
7
Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> On 01/07, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev wrote:
> > Then perhaps those opposed could suggest how to use Phabricator/Arcanist
> so
> > that I don't throw my keyboard through my monitor?
>
> Please explain your problems, w/o the hyperbole, so people can actually do
>
2020 Jan 14
5
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:56:53PM +0000, Renato Golin via cfe-dev wrote:
> GitHub PR is the "de facto standard", everyone knows, the entry cost
> is practically zero. The UI is lean and missing features, but the
> large availability of tooling (either targeting GitHub directly or
> plain git) makes up for a lot of it.
Just like with the "Everyone knows git", I
2020 Jan 08
5
Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
Now that we're on GitHub, can we *please* move to GitHub PRs? As much as I
hate git, I hate Phabricator/Archanist even more. They're super clunky and
makes working in git that much worse.
-bw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200107/e47b7e36/attachment.html>
2020 Jan 08
3
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:35 PM Jonas Devlieghere <jonas at devlieghere.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM Bill Wendling via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bill,
> >>
> >> On 01/07, Bill Wendling
2020 Jan 14
5
Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 13:43, Nicolai Hähnle via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> It's worth pointing out that GitHub is not able to do this properly,
> either. The problem on GitHub's side is that while a pull request can
> contain multiple commits, one cannot properly review those commits
> individually, and it is not at all possible to approve individual
2016 Jan 07
3
Phabricator/Arcanist feedback
On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Hi Dan, thanks for the feedback.
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:24 AM Dan Liew <dan at su-root.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I recently tried reviewing/committing some of my code on
>> Phabricator/Arcanist for the first time and I noticed that the docs
2020 Apr 09
3
Delete Phabricator metadata tags before committing
Can we fix this in reviews.llvm.org's fork of phab?
https://github.com/phacility/phabricator/blob/cac3dc4983c3671ba4ec841aac8efac10744a80c/src/applications/differential/conduit/DifferentialGetCommitMessageConduitAPIMethod.php
Seems straightforward(-ish) to drop the relevant fields there, that way
`arc land` automatically DTRT.
Jon
On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 11:30 PM Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev
2020 Jan 08
5
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
I'm not sure a decision was already made as such. I think it's more that there was a flurry of conversation last time with lots of conflicting opinions, and then the conversation just fizzled out.
FWIW, I like Phabricator but I'm willing to try GitHub. Overall I think we should take the same approach that eventually led to Phabricator being widely adopted: We should allow GitHub
2016 Nov 16
2
Highlighting trailing whitespaces on Phab?
So, I forwarded the request for highlighting trailing whitespaces to
phabricator upstream (https://secure.phabricator.com/T11879), and upstream
folks suggest we enable the Lint feature in Arcanist (
https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/arcanist_lint/). This
will enforce the check when `arc diff` is run (reviewers wouldn't see the
warnings though).
There are two linters we
2016 Nov 16
2
Highlighting trailing whitespaces on Phab?
Why isn’t it in the LLVM repo?
> On Nov 16, 2016, at 7:44 AM, Johannes Doerfert <doerfert at cs.uni-saarland.de> wrote:
>
> We have a clang format based arcanist linter (and some others) in the
> Polly repository. When arcanist is used to create a review, the linter
> result is shown online. We also have an arcanist add-on to run the lit
> tests and show their result in
2015 Dec 28
5
Phabricator/Arcanist feedback
Hi,
I recently tried reviewing/committing some of my code on
Phabricator/Arcanist for the first time and I noticed that the docs
[1] ask for feedback, so here it is!
Phabricator functions reasonably well and it is a lot easier to write
comments and respond to comments on particular parts of code as
opposed to the old way of copy and pasting patches into e-mails sent
to llvm-commits. Two minors
2020 Jan 14
3
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
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.
>
2020 Jan 16
4
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 10:30 AM David Greene via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
>
> > One typical case for a patch series is if you need infrastructure in a
> > number of places in place first. Sending all changes at once allow
> > others to see where you are going, independent
2020 Jan 15
2
[cfe-dev] Phabricator -> GitHub PRs?
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:47, Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote:
> I'd say that helping people to improve their environment is better than
> forcing others to worsen theirs.
Note the difference: One side is trying to *help improve", while the
other is *forcing to worsen*.
This is really not helpful.
--renato
2020 Aug 10
2
How to deal with multiple patches to the same file
At 8/10/2020 03:02 PM, Robinson, Paul wrote:
>> Why did you 'git pull --rebase' when the branch was up-to-date? Is this
>> just a safety habit?
>
>Yes. Frequently I put my patches on my local master branch, rather
>than create a separate patch branch, and always rebasing keeps my
>commits at the HEAD of the branch. It's harmless when you have no
>local
2016 Jan 07
2
Phabricator/Arcanist feedback
> On Jan 7, 2016, at 9:57 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 7, 2016, at 9:45 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
2020 Jan 21
2
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