Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

Sunday 01 Nov 2015 18:08:06, James Le Cuirot wrote : > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:44:39 +1100 > Michael Palimaka wrote: > > > Phabricator also has all sorts of fancy (optional) features that could > > be useful for collaborative development (see http://phabricator.org/ > > for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 phabricator is very problematic in that it is a huge piece of PHP software that is very difficult to change, and it's virtually impossible to upstream your changes, unless they are simple bug fixes. It is tailored to Facebook's workflow. Their

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:44:39 +1100 Michael Palimaka wrote: > There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull > requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator > instance against gentoo.git to see how a free alternative might work. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On 11/01/2015 06:44 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: > There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull > requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator > instance against gentoo.git to see how a free alternative might work. > > Here's a few examples of how things

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:44:39 +1100 Michael Palimaka wrote: > Phabricator also has all sorts of fancy (optional) features that could > be useful for collaborative development (see http://phabricator.org/ > for more info). > > What do you think? Looks nice! I hadn't heard

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Does it actually support pull requests at all? All I was able to find > was ability to paste a diff... > > Phabricator supports both pre-commit code review and post-commit code review. It's not a pull request, but code

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 08:23:22PM +0100, hasufell wrote: > On 11/01/2015 06:44 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: > > There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull > > requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator > > instance against gentoo.git to see how a free

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On 11/01/2015 08:50 PM, Manuel Rüger wrote: > On 01.11.2015 20:23, hasufell wrote: >> On 11/01/2015 06:44 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: >>> There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull >>> requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator >>> instance against

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On 11/01/2015 04:18 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > My question is this. > > Does it offer interfaces other than the web -- such as an API or command > line client? > > If not, I wouldn't use it. There's Arcanist, but there are no releases. You're supposed to clone the git repo. Arcanist requires

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

You might be interested in a few ebuild I made for it for Enlightenment: http://git.meleeweb.net/gentoo/portage.git/tree/dev-php/libphutil http://git.meleeweb.net/gentoo/portage.git/tree/www-client/arcanist http://git.meleeweb.net/gentoo/portage.git/tree/www-apps/phabricator Cheers On

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On 01/11/15 23:07, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 11/01/2015 12:44 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: >> There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull >> requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator >> instance against gentoo.git to see how a free alternative might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-hosted code review

On 11/01/2015 12:44 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: > There's been a lot of discussion about relying on GitHub for pull > requests and code review and such, so I have set up a Phabricator > instance against gentoo.git to see how a free alternative might work. > > ... > > What do you think? >