-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/10/14 09:18, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
On 20/10/14 21:13, Ben Gamari wrote:
1. Do nothing, ignore pull requests as we do now
2. Monitor Github for new pull requests and close with a message
requesting that the user opens a
: Is there a way we
can turn GitHub pull requests into Phab code reviews?
Since things have died down here a bit this might be a good time to
review the points made and distill some conclusions,
1. There is a large number of people who maintain that arc poses
a significant barrier to new
Whoops, accidentally only addressed Ben instead of the list:
On 20 Oct 2014, at 12:13 , Ben Gamari bgamari.f...@gmail.com wrote:
a) Confusion between Github issue numbers, Trac bug numbers, and
Phabricator identifiers
It is possible to disable GitHub issues on a repository, would this not at
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
doesn't look like that will happen soon:
Hey Joachim,
Disabling that linking is not possible currently, and I'm not sure
if that feature will be available in the near future. Still, I'll
add your request to our feature request
Hi,
Am Montag, den 06.10.2014, 19:32 +0200 schrieb Joachim Breitner:
Am Montag, den 06.10.2014, 17:54 +0200 schrieb Tuncer Ayaz:
By the way, while the Github team has no public ticket system, they
are very responsive when you send them feature requests or, say,
explain where the review
This is also the thing that worries most about arc: Squashing commits.
Splitting commits into
* things that only do whitespace changes
* things that only add comments
* things that only refactor
* things that actually introduce a semantic change
*is* very valuable also for the efficency of
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Andreas Abel wrote:
This is also the thing that worries most about arc: Squashing
commits. Splitting commits into
* things that only do whitespace changes
* things that only add comments
* things that only refactor
* things that actually introduce a semantic
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2014, 19:20 +0200 schrieb Tuncer Ayaz:
There's also the problem that Github's review system is not as
powerful and most importantly does not preserve history like
Gerrit or Phabricator do. Once used to it,
To be completely clear, arc does not FORCE you to squash commits.
You can simply arc diff each commit in question seperately.
Now, it is certainly true that arc does not make this easy to do.
See: https://secure.phabricator.com/T5636
Edward
Excerpts from Andreas Abel's message of 2014-10-06
Hi,
Am Montag, den 06.10.2014, 17:54 +0200 schrieb Tuncer Ayaz:
By the way, while the Github team has no public ticket system, they
are very responsive when you send them feature requests or, say,
explain where the review system is incomplete/broken. They never
promise anything and do not
that the suggestion just to accept GitHub pull requests
will lead to confusion, if only for the namespace problem. If we start to
accept pull requests, then we are de facto going to have to deal with both the
GH issue tracker and Trac's (and Phab's), and that is a terrible place to be.
Part
a deliberative process and
am grateful that we have leaders in this area in our midst.
Agreed. Phab certainly has a learning curve and is not without its
papercuts but on the whole seems to be an excellent tool.
All that said, I think that the suggestion just to accept GitHub pull
requests will lead
/the_ghc_source_code_contains_1088_todos_please/
For better or worse, I don't read reddit often enough to hold a
conversation there, so I'll ask my question here: Is there a way we
can turn GitHub pull requests into Phab code reviews? I'm thinking of
something like this:
...
I'm still
question here: Is there a way we
can turn GitHub pull requests into Phab code reviews? I'm thinking of
something like this:
My greatest worry about allowing GitHub PRs to the
github.com.ghc/ghc.git repo is that GitHub and Trac use the very same
`#[0-9]+` syntax tokens for referring to tickets and PRs
On 05.10.2014 07:03, Ben Gamari wrote:
and yet aren't willing to take the five (twenty?) minutes to familiarize
themselves with Phabricator and the arc toolchain.
Are you serious about this? I think your time estimate is a grand
illusion. I attended Joachim Breitner's talk about Phabricator
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Andreas Abel ab...@chalmers.se wrote:
On 05.10.2014 07:03, Ben Gamari wrote:
and yet aren't willing to take the five (twenty?) minutes to familiarize
themselves with Phabricator and the arc toolchain.
Are you serious about this? I think your time estimate
: surprisingly simple solution ahead) we could consider the
option of simply accepting Github pull requests!
I think it could work well ok if we either
* somehow communicate that people should open a trac ticket as well, if
they want to make sure their contribution is handled in a timely
manner
Hello,
On 2014-10-05 at 14:03:41 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2014, 13:08 +0200 schrieb Herbert Valerio Riedel:
On 2014-10-05 at 12:56:28 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
[...]
I think the advantage could outweigh the downside and it’s worth a try.
We don’t even
Andreas Abel ab...@chalmers.se writes:
On 05.10.2014 07:03, Ben Gamari wrote:
and yet aren't willing to take the five (twenty?) minutes to familiarize
themselves with Phabricator and the arc toolchain.
Are you serious about this? I think your time estimate is a grand
illusion.
Fair
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2014, 19:20 +0200 schrieb Tuncer Ayaz:
There's also the problem that Github's review system is not as
powerful and most importantly does not preserve history like Gerrit or
Phabricator do. Once used to it, maintainers probably won't be happy
to lose productivity due
Is there any particular reason why taking in GitHub pull requests would be
more problematic than, say, applying patches attached to Trac bugs? Both
have to be dealt with manually by someone with commit rights for the
canonical repository anyway. If the issue is important enough that, say,
tracking
I've just finished reading this:
http://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/2hes8m/the_ghc_source_code_contains_1088_todos_please/
For better or worse, I don't read reddit often enough to hold a conversation
there, so I'll ask my question here: Is there a way we can turn GitHub pull
requests
: Is there a way we
can turn GitHub pull requests into Phab code reviews? I'm thinking of
something like this:
...
I'm still quite unsure of how many people exist who,
* find a bug they need to fix,
* are willing to dig into the GHC codebase and fix it,
* clean up their fix enough to submit
23 matches
Mail list logo
