Re: Phabricator/Lando update, November 2017

2017-12-07 Thread Mark Côté
entication > >> option was TOTP that requires a smartphone. I do not have a smartphone > >> like Mark. > >> > >> How can I continue to contribute after we are forced to use Phabricator? > >> Mozilla no longer wants volunteer contributors? > >> > >>

Re: Phabricator/Lando update, November 2017

2017-11-29 Thread Mark Côté
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 12:43:58 UTC-5, Steve Fink wrote: > On 11/29/2017 08:35 AM, Mark Côté wrote: > > I posted an update on Phabricator and Lando to my blog a couple weeks ago, > > but I figured I should share it here too: > > https://mrcote.info/blog/2017/11/17/

Re: Phabricator/Lando update, November 2017

2017-11-29 Thread Mark Côté
Right, I should have mentioned that. We are working right now on enforcing MFA for Phabricator via BMO. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1393950. Should go out next week. Mark On Nov 29, 2017 12:41 PM, "Andreas Tolfsen" <a...@sny.no> wrote: > Also sprach Mark

Phabricator/Lando update, November 2017

2017-11-29 Thread Mark Côté
I posted an update on Phabricator and Lando to my blog a couple weeks ago, but I figured I should share it here too: https://mrcote.info/blog/2017/11/17/phabricator-and-lando-november-update/ There are two important points: 1. Our Phabricator instance has been up and running for a few months

Re: Phabricator and confidential reviews

2017-08-28 Thread Mark Côté
On Saturday, 26 August 2017 00:40:08 UTC-4, Randell Jesup wrote: > >And don't forget reporter and assignees. Occasionally a reporter not in the > >security group will notice that a patch is insufficient which is nicer to > >find before the patch is committed than after the commit link is added to

Re: Phabricator and confidential reviews

2017-08-09 Thread Mark Côté
For brevity and clarity I'm just replying to Dan here, but I am attempting to address other points raised so far in this thread. On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 13:07:08 UTC-4, Daniel Veditz wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Mark Côté <mc...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > > I am

Phabricator and confidential reviews

2017-08-08 Thread Mark Côté
(Cross-posted to mozilla.tools) Hi, I have an update and a request for comments regarding Phabricator and confidential reviews. We've completed the functionality around limiting access to Differential revisions (i.e. code reviews) that are tied to confidential bugs. To recap the original

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-24 Thread Mark Côté
On Wednesday, 19 July 2017 16:19:02 UTC-4, Randell Jesup wrote: > >On 2017-07-14 1:31 AM, Jim Blandy wrote: > >> Many people seem to be asking, essentially: What will happen to old bugs? > >> I'm trying to follow the discussion, and I'm not clear on this myself. > >> > >> For example, "Splinter

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-17 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-07-17 8:46 PM, Edmund Wong wrote: Mike Hoye wrote: Given that we've been talking about this stuff for years now, I think it's very clear that we haven't come to this point by "somebody at the top issuing an edict that they want something modern"; the decision to commit to Phabricator

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-17 Thread Mark Côté
I filed a central tracker bug for production Phabricator deployment: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1381498. I have filed blockers and dependencies for a variety of related tasks as discussed in these threads. Mark On 2017-07-14 11:33 AM, Milan Sreckovic wrote: Replying in

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-14 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-07-14 1:31 AM, Jim Blandy wrote: Many people seem to be asking, essentially: What will happen to old bugs? I'm trying to follow the discussion, and I'm not clear on this myself. For example, "Splinter will be turned off." For commenting and reviewing, okay, understood. What about

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-13 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-07-13 3:54 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Byron Jones wrote: But indeed having also the patches in bugzilla would be good. no, it would be bad for patches to be duplicated into bugzilla. we're moving from bugzilla/mozreview to

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-07-11 9:51 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Mark Côté <mc...@mozilla.com> wrote: * MozReview and Splinter turned off in early December. Is this bugzilla-wide? I know that other project use splinter still. Will those projects be able to use phabr

Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
support? Chris. On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 8:42:06 AM UTC+12, Mark Côté wrote: Hi all, here's a brief update on the project to deploy and integrate Phabricator at Mozilla: * Development Phabricator instance is up at https://mozphab.dev.mozaws.net/, authenticated via bugzilla

Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
Hi all, here's a brief update on the project to deploy and integrate Phabricator at Mozilla: * Development Phabricator instance is up at https://mozphab.dev.mozaws.net/, authenticated via bugzilla-dev.allizom.org. * Development, read-only UI for Lando (the new automatic-landing service) has

Re: Please write good commit messages before asking for code review

2017-03-09 Thread Mark Côté
Oops just saw this after I posted separately about this feature. Yeah, I agree it's a bit confusing. We have a few ideas for making this better differentiated; will open a bug. Mark On 2017-03-09 3:29 PM, Kyle Machulis wrote: This has actually been confusing me in reviews, since the

Re: Please write good commit messages before asking for code review

2017-03-09 Thread Mark Côté
On 2017-03-09 4:48 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 3/9/17 4:35 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: I'm in favor of good commit messages, but I would note that current m-c convention really pushes against this, because people seem to feel that commit messages should be one line. They feel wrong, and we

Re: Readable Bug Statuses in Bugzilla

2016-05-24 Thread Mark Côté
Indeed, see tracking bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1150541 Mark On 2016-05-24 1:03 PM, Emma Humphries wrote: > Yes, the plan is that the 'Modal' view will become the default, and the bmo > team is working on that. > > Meanwhile, you can beat the rush and switch over to the

Re: Triage Plan for Firefox Components

2016-04-13 Thread Mark Côté
On 2016-04-13 9:34 AM, Gervase Markham wrote: > On 12/04/16 21:01, Mark Côté wrote: >> Meant to reply to this earlier... BMO has a User Story field that sounds >> like it does exactly what you want. It's an editable field that keeps >> history (admittedly not i

Re: Triage Plan for Firefox Components

2016-04-12 Thread Mark Côté
On 2016-04-07 2:50 AM, L. David Baron wrote: > (I'd much rather a bug report be editable text, with history > available, for answers to these or similar questions -- rather than > a stream of permanent comments. But we seem stuck with the horrid > stream-of-comments Bugzilla format, which means I

Re: [Bug 1224726] High memory consumption when opening and searching a large Javascript file in debugger.

2016-04-11 Thread Mark Côté
Tagging the comments as spam will autoban the account after a certain number. It will also autocollapse the comments. Mark On 2016-04-11 6:35 PM, Lawrence Mandel wrote: > Good intentions or not, we need to stop this activity. > > Mark - What's our usual approach to address bug spam? > >

MozReview's interdiffs

2016-04-07 Thread Mark Côté
MozReview, specifically, Review Board, has a number of bugs related to interdiffs[1]. Many of these bugs are related to Review Board's algorithms to filter out changes caused by rebases (as opposed to intentional updates to commits). Both the MozReview and the Review Board teams have done some

Re: Why is Mozreview hassling me about squashed commits?

2016-04-04 Thread Mark Côté
On 2016-04-04 8:41 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Mark Côté <mc...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> To answer the original question, though, at this time we have no plans >> to completely do away with the squashed-commit view. However, in the >

Re: Why is Mozreview hassling me about squashed commits?

2016-04-04 Thread Mark Côté
On 2016-04-04 10:07 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:09 PM, L. David Baron wrote: > >> On Saturday 2016-04-02 18:51 -0300, Eric Rescorla wrote: >>> 1. I write a bunch of code, committing along the way, so I have a lot of >>> commits named "Checkpoint" and

Re: MozReview/Autoland in degraded state

2016-02-05 Thread Mark Côté
We will be deploying a fix for the ssh-level restrictions to MozReview shortly, around 2:30 pm EST/11:30 am PST. MozReview will be down for about 10 minutes if all goes smoothly. We'll be able to rollback not long after that if there are unresolvable issues. You can follow along in #mozreview.

Re: MozReview/Autoland in degraded state

2016-02-05 Thread Mark Côté
back here when they're back, hopefully Monday. Mark On 2016-02-05 1:42 PM, Mark Côté wrote: > We will be deploying a fix for the ssh-level restrictions to MozReview > shortly, around 2:30 pm EST/11:30 am PST. MozReview will be down for > about 10 minutes if all goes smoothly. We'll

Re: Just Autoland It

2016-01-29 Thread Mark Côté
On 2016-01-29 10:27 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Andrew Halberstadt < > ahalberst...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> On 28/01/16 06:31 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Gregory Szorc >>> wrote: >>> >>> I'd like to thank

New BMO SSL certificate coming 2015/10/29

2015-10-27 Thread Mark Côté
BMO's SSL certificate expires on 2015/10/30, so please be advised we will be installing a new one around 13:30 UTC on 2015/10/29 (9:30 am EDT/6:30 am PDT). The new fingerprint will be 7c:7a:c4:6c:91:3b:6b:89:cf:f2:8c:13:b8:02:c4:25:bd:1e:25:17 `mach hgsetup` will be patched as soon as the new

MozReview now uses Bugzilla's auth delegation

2015-08-26 Thread Mark Côté
tl;dr We improved the authentication system in MozReview. Please log out (if necessary) and back into the MozReview UI (Review Board) before pushing any commits up for review. Today we deployed a change to MozReview's authentication system. Rather than logging into Review Board with your

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-11 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-11 4:46 PM, Chris Hofmann wrote: On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Mike Hoye mh...@mozilla.com wrote: On 2015-06-11 3:48 PM, R Kent James wrote: Maybe the correct fix is to start paying attention to votes. If you choose your project priorities based on internet voting, you're

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-11 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-11 6:43 PM, Chris Hofmann wrote: Furthermore, since bugs with lots of votes also have lots of CCs (see an earlier post of mine), if we want to just acknowledge that a bug is popular, we can just use CC counts above a certain threshold. Admittedly there's no way to search for that,

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-10 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-09 11:58 PM, Wayne wrote: That said, there are much bigger issues with Bugzilla's UI, and removing voting is probably the smallest possible improvement. But it's probably easy to just disable it for a while, and see what happens? I never have seen the voting UI as being the least

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-10 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-10 7:06 AM, Philipp Kewisch wrote: I could live without this feature if the number of people on CC gives some indication of how wanted a feature may be. Can you check correlation between the number of votes and the number of people on CC? A quick scan of the Core Firefox products

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-10 Thread Mark Côté
Thanks for all the input on this feature. This was a good discussion. Here's what I've learned: * Almost no one makes decisions based on the number of votes (Thunderbird and related may be an exception). ** Ergo, most users voting on bugs are probably being misled into thinking their vote

Voting in BMO

2015-06-09 Thread Mark Côté
In a quest to simplify both the interface and the maintenance of bugzilla.mozilla.org, we're looking for features that are of questionable value to see if we can get rid of them. As I'm sure everyone knows, Bugzilla grew organically, without much of a road map, over a long time, and it

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-09 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-09 5:39 PM, Sören Hentzschel wrote: On 09.06.15 23:24, Chris Peterson wrote: I vote for bugs as a polite (sneaky?) way to watch a bug's bugmail without spamming all the other CCs by adding myself to the bug's real CC list. Same here. Removing the voting feature means that I will

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-09 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-09 5:24 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Mark Côté mc...@mozilla.com wrote: In a quest to simplify both the interface and the maintenance of bugzilla.mozilla.org, we're looking for features that are of questionable value to see if we can get rid of them

Re: Voting in BMO

2015-06-09 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-06-09 6:00 PM, Justin Dolske wrote: That said, there are much bigger issues with Bugzilla's UI, and removing voting is probably the smallest possible improvement. But it's probably easy to just disable it for a while, and see what happens? Indeed, it's a minor thing. Consider it a

You can now log into BMO with your GitHub account

2015-04-27 Thread Mark Côté
This morning we enabled a feature on bugzilla.mozilla.org that allows users to log in with their GitHub credentials, similar to our existing Persona support. If you have several email addresses associated with your GitHub account, you will be prompted to choose one. In either case, if your

Re: You can now log into BMO with your GitHub account

2015-04-27 Thread Mark Côté
On 2015-04-27 10:41 AM, Mike Hoye wrote: On 2015-04-27 10:15 AM, Mark Côté wrote: This morning we enabled a feature on bugzilla.mozilla.org that allows users to log in with their GitHub credentials, similar to our existing Persona support. If you have several email addresses associated

Re: MozReview ready for general use

2014-11-10 Thread Mark Côté
AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote: Is there any chance we could log in with Persona? Cheers, David On 06/11/14 05:50, Mark Côté wrote: A couple months ago I gave a sneak peak into our new repository-based code-review tool based on Review Board. I'm excited to announce that this tool

Re: MozReview ready for general use

2014-11-10 Thread Mark Côté
, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: It looks like all reviews (and patches) are currently public. Is there some way to have them not be so, for security/confidential bugs/reviews? ~ Gijs On 06/11/2014 04:50, Mark Côté wrote: A couple months ago I gave a sneak peak into our new repository-based code

MozReview ready for general use

2014-11-05 Thread Mark Côté
A couple months ago I gave a sneak peak into our new repository-based code-review tool based on Review Board. I'm excited to announce that this tool, now named (descriptively but unimaginatively) MozReview, is ready for general use. In the interests of beta-testing our documentation at the same

Re: Review Board Preview

2014-09-15 Thread Mark Côté
gecko, right? On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Mark Côté mc...@mozilla.com wrote: I know lots of people are very interested in the on-going project to replace Splinter with a modern code-review tool. After a colourful variety of setbacks, this project[1], based on Review Board[2], is very

Review Board Preview

2014-09-04 Thread Mark Côté
I know lots of people are very interested in the on-going project to replace Splinter with a modern code-review tool. After a colourful variety of setbacks, this project[1], based on Review Board[2], is very nearly ready for initial deployment. I put up a preview screencast on my blog[3] to give

Re: BzAPI Compatibility API has been rolled out to production BMO

2014-06-26 Thread Mark Côté
On 2014-06-25, 3:21 PM, jmor...@mozilla.com wrote: This is terrific! The docs make mention of POST under bz_rest_options. Do you now (or will you at some point) support bug creation via API? Would you do full CRUD at some point? Yes, the native REST API already supports bug creation (as

Re: BzAPI Compatibility API has been rolled out to production BMO

2014-06-25 Thread Mark Côté
Those are just the API root paths, for reference. For example, to view a bug, they would be https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bzapi/bug/35 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/rest/bug/35 Mark On 2014-06-22, 4:42 AM, Josh Matthews wrote: [5] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bzapi [6]

Re: bugzilla can now show bugs that have been updated since you last visited them

2014-06-05 Thread Mark Côté
On 2014-06-04, 3:01 PM, Neil wrote: Byron Jones wrote: thanks to dylan's work on bug 489028, bugzilla now tracks when you view a bug, allowing you to search for bugs which have been updated since you last visited them. I shared a basic search which I call Unseen Changes. I was slightly

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-11 Thread Mark Côté
On 2013-07-11 7:59 AM, Gervase Markham wrote: On 09/07/13 21:29, Chris Peterson wrote: I've seen people change their Bugzilla name to include a comment about being on PTO. We should promote this practice. We could also add a Bugzilla feature (just a simple check box or a PTO date range) that

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Mark Côté
On 2013-07-09 4:48 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 7/9/13 4:29 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: Bugzilla's interdiff is totally unsuitable for this purpose, unfortunately, because it fails so often. Can we fix Bugzilla's interdiff? Not easily, because it does not have access to the original code...

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Mark Côté
On 2013-07-10 2:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 7/10/13 1:58 PM, Mark Côté wrote: The BMO team is again considering switching to ReviewBoard, which should fix this problem How does ReviewBoard address this? Again, what we have in the bug is diff 1 against changeset A and diff 2 against