similar to: FYI, Phabricator is really slow due to HN about LLD

Recently LLD made it to the front page of HN (yay!): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13670458 This comment about the Solaris linker surprised me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13672364 """ > To me, the biggest advantage is cross compiling Not all system linkers have this problem. For example, Solaris ld(1) is perfectly capable of cross-linking any valid ELF file.

The folks working on phab are busily propping it up. It should be relatively healthy now. On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 9:20 AM Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 4 January 2018 at 10:23, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Sending a note here as this seems likely to be of relatively broad > interest. >

On 4 January 2018 at 10:23, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Sending a note here as this seems likely to be of relatively broad interest. > > Thread: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20180101/513630.html > > Review link: > https://reviews.llvm.org/D41723# It seems the review link is getting wider coverage

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 27 June 2014 21:53, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> > wrote: > > Then the only way for people to "accept" something is by typing text > > to that effect. > > If you don't "Accept" the patch, you can't close the issue. So, either

I know you worked hard to make sure 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).

> -----Original Message----- > From: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] On > Behalf Of Lamar Owen > Sent: den 7 april 2016 16:21 > To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Openshot 2.x (beta) on C7?? > > It does take more disk space to do this. > > And while I have always been a big fan of RPM and

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

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

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:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 18:45, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure where the idea that a patch series is anything other than that ^ came from. When I was talking about a patch series, it was/is with that definition in mind - ordered/dependent commits. I said "dependent series" to reinforce this idea that the kind of situation I was describing was one

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

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

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

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 1:17 PM David Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: > Hubert Tong <hubert.reinterpretcast at gmail.com> writes: > > >> I can see how having multiple patches up at once for review might speed > >> things up. But what if a very first patch in a series needs major > >> changes and that affects every single following patch? The

> On 2014-Jun-27, at 11:50, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: >> I know you worked hard to make sure 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

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. >

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

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

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

It seems emails to me were not sent out due to them being held back by sendgrid spam protection. In case somebody else has this problem, this might be something to look into. Best, Tobias On Fri, Jul 14, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev wrote: > Phab was down during the night, should be back up now. When phab is down, > emails don't get sent out (all emails get sent out