Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Phabricator update"
2015 Jul 08
3
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
You were in sendgrid's bounce list (there must have been at least one
bounce from your email to the apple servers). Please let me know if other
people had similar problems.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 6:11 PM Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote:
> Hi Manuel,
>
> Thanks for the update it has some nice new features. There is one issue I
> am seeing since the update though. I
2015 Jul 08
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
> On Jul 8, 2015, at 9:19 AM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2015, at 9:16 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com <mailto:klimek at google.com>> wrote:
>>
>> You were in sendgrid's bounce list (there must have been at least one bounce from your email to the apple servers). Please let me know if other people had
2015 Jul 09
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
I filed a ticket with sendgrid. Since we're paying them money nowadays, I
hope they'll answer quickly
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:05 AM Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> aaaaaand you're on the bounce list again. I'm going to delete you again,
> but I'd be curious what the problem is...
>
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 6:50 PM Adam Nemet <anemet at
2015 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
Do you have a bounced email, we can look at for clues?
> On Jul 10, 2015, at 12:49 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, apple addresses still bounce without a reason - the sendgrid folks say this is completely controlled by apple.com <http://apple.com/>'s mail servers - do you have somebody you can ask?
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:10 AM Manuel
2015 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
It's actually surprising to me that the emails from Phabricator and llvm's
svn *DO* get through most of the time.
Both of these fabricate the "From" address to generate an email purportedly
be from the author of the svn revision or phabricator comment's email
address. While the message is hopefully from the real person behind that
email address, those messages are decidedly
2015 Jul 02
3
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
This might be slightly off topic, but I'd really like a way to be able to
run the buildbots off a Phabricator Diff before committing.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately threading will be broken for changes currently under review
> (new patches shouldn't have the problem).
> I'm very sorry for this inconvenience
2015 Jul 02
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:27 PM Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com>
wrote:
> Even further off topic, in phab wishlist land: It'd be awesome if it
> were capable of inferring extended patch context by looking at the svn
> repo/git mirrors (rather than requiring the person submitting the patch
> to re-upload with -U999).
>
Yea, this is hard, because detecting
2015 Jul 03
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 10:02 AM Andrew Wilkins <axwalk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 at 01:43 Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:27 PM Jonathan Roelofs <
>> jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Even further off topic, in phab wishlist land: It'd be awesome if it
>>> were
2015 Jul 08
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
Those seem to be comments by the original author? Is this a problem?
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:31 AM Tamas Berghammer <tberghammer at google.com>
wrote:
> Hi Manual,
>
> Since the Phabricator update I noticed that the username of the reviewer
> isn't displayed for some comment added to the review (e.g.:
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D11016). Can you check it out what is
2014 Jul 01
16
[LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users
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
2014 Dec 11
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com
> wrote:
> I think the send-email part of phab has yet to come back up.
>
Yes, restarting it would be very helpful.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jon
>
>
> On 12/10/14 1:59 PM, Manuel Klimek wrote:
>
>> Phab is back up - it's still a little slow (the mysql database we use is
2014 Dec 11
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu Dec 11 2014 at 2:16:00 AM Alexey Samsonov <vonosmas at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <
>> jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the send-email part of phab has yet to come back up.
>>>
2014 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
Another php type problem; can you please try again. Thanks!
On Thu Dec 11 2014 at 1:37:32 PM Bruno Cardoso Lopes <
bruno.cardoso at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm facing the same problem.
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:16 AM, suyog sarda <sardask01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I am facing problem while submitting patch on phab. All things go smooth
> -
>
2014 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
Hi,
I am facing problem while submitting patch on phab. All things go smooth -
create diff, create revision, specify title and comments. However, when I
try to submit the diff by clicking "save" button, it takes a lot of time
and eventually times out, failing to submit the patch.
Any help on this?
On Thursday, December 11, 2014, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>
2014 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
Hi Manuel,
Thanks for the help. Still persists for me too. Instead of waiting
indefinitely, now I get this error:
Unhandled Exception ("AphrontDeadlockQueryException")
#1205: Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:26 AM, suyog sarda <sardask01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem still persist :(
>
> On 12/11/14, Manuel Klimek
2014 Dec 11
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Phabricator update
Heya, I'll look into it first thing tomorrow - probably a problem with the
encoding settings.
On Thu Dec 11 2014 at 9:17:40 PM Robinson, Paul <
Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote:
> What I'm seeing is that Phabricator emails double-space *everything*
> (not just the diffs).
>
> --paulr
>
>
>
> *From:* cfe-dev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu
2014 Dec 10
2
[LLVMdev] Phabricator update
Phab is back up - it's still a little slow (the mysql database we use is
doing some cleanups).
On Wed Dec 10 2014 at 5:07:07 PM suyog sarda <sardask01 at gmail.com> wrote:
> And i was thinking something wrong with my proxy configuration :P
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>
>> Heya,
>>
>> if you wonder
2020 Jun 19
2
Phabricator Maintenance
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020, 18:55 Hubert Tong, <hubert.reinterpretcast at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:32 PM Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Just my 2 cents here: we are working on enabling this as a part of
>> bugzilla migration as PRs and issues are very tied inside GitHub. Stay
>> tuned for updates!
2020 Jun 24
3
[cfe-dev] Phabricator Maintenance
I understand that keeping this within one company is easiest from an organization perspective, so if Fangrui and Mehdi (and other Googlers) are able to take this on, that’s great. If not, I can raise this internally at Facebook. An estimate of the total costs incurred would be helpful for that, e.g. you mentioned Sendgrid being a couple of hundred dollars a month.
Thanks,
Shoaib
From: llvm-dev
2014 May 19
2
[LLVMdev] phabricator says "this commit is still importing"
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote:
> On 12 May 2014 08:35, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> It seems that we cannot execute svn commands against llvm-project any
> >> more:
> >> $ svn