Hi,
On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 03:30:48 +0100
Thomas Lübking wrote:
> On Samstag, 24. Januar 2015 15:24:28 CET, Thomas Friedrichsmeier
> wrote:
>
> > But beyond review functionality, I think moving towards a more
> > integrated solution is clearly a step in the right direction, and
> > this is what mak
On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 03:30:48 Thomas Lübking wrote:
> On Samstag, 24. Januar 2015 15:24:28 CET, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> > But beyond review functionality, I think moving towards a more
> > integrated solution is clearly a step in the right direction, and this
> > is what makes the c
On Tuesday, 27 January 2015 09:51:46 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
Jenkins provides rich tracking of tests, code coverage and code
quality (eg: cppcheck) in addition to checking if it builds.
Zuul is designed to determine if it builds and if tests fail -
providing a binary pass/fail response.
This
Hi all,
Based on the feedback we'll now begin putting together a test instance
so Phabricator can be seriously evaluated by the community.
I've noted that the following projects have expressed interest in using it:
- Calligra/Krita.
- Zanshin.
- KActivities.
- Konversation.
If any other projects
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Thomas Lübking
wrote:
> On Samstag, 24. Januar 2015 15:24:28 CET, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
>
>> But beyond review functionality, I think moving towards a more
>> integrated solution is clearly a step in the right direction, and this
>> is what makes the choice
On Samstag, 24. Januar 2015 15:24:28 CET, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
But beyond review functionality, I think moving towards a more
integrated solution is clearly a step in the right direction, and this
is what makes the choice of Phabricator over Gerrit a clear case to me.
I assume we all
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Matthew Dawson wrote:
> On January 21, 2015 05:12:07 PM Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>>
>> It contains a detailed summary
On January 21, 2015 05:12:07 PM Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why change is n
Hi!
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 17:12:07 +1300
Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why ch
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 4:05 AM, Thomas Lübking
wrote:
> On Freitag, 23. Januar 2015 03:34:11 CET, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>> For that particular post - we would need to install Arcanist on all of
>> the build nodes behind build.kde.org.
>> The libphutil part you see there goes on the Phabricator in
On Freitag, 23. Januar 2015 03:34:11 CET, Ben Cooksley wrote:
For that particular post - we would need to install Arcanist on all of
the build nodes behind build.kde.org.
The libphutil part you see there goes on the Phabricator instance
itself - and is used to inform Jenkins that it needs to per
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:27 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Thursday 22 January 2015 08:25:08 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
> Hey, thanks for the clarification. I'll remove everything which I think was
> sufficiently answered by you.
No problem.
>
>
>
>> > Furthermore, some open questions from my side, r
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Friday 23 January 2015 15:40:40 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd lik
On Friday 23 January 2015 15:40:40 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> >> report on the state of the in
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Dominik Haumann wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2015 22:20:18 Eike Hein wrote:
>>
>> On 01/21/2015 05:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> > report on the state of the infrastructu
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>>
>> It contains a detailed summ
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 22:20:18 Eike Hein wrote:
>
> On 01/21/2015 05:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> > report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> As someone on the original git inf
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why chang
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why chang
On Thursday 22 January 2015 08:25:08 Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hey, thanks for the clarification. I'll remove everything which I think was
sufficiently answered by you.
> > Furthermore, some open questions from my side, regarding Phabricator:
> >
> > - is it really trivial to implement commit hooks
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:57:07 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>
>> Using either
>> http://www.guywarner.com/2014/06/part-2-integrating-phabricator-and.html
>> or http://www.dctrwatson.com/2013/01/jenkins-and-phabricator/ or a
>> variation t
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:57:07 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
Using either
http://www.guywarner.com/2014/06/part-2-integrating-phabricator-and.html
or http://www.dctrwatson.com/2013/01/jenkins-and-phabricator/ or a
variation thereof.
That is quite some custom code that one has to maintain,
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:12:33 CEST, Thomas Lübking wrote:
The bug cooked up for asking google about gerrit and scratch repos.
The problem is that pushing into any branch would close a
review - I can only assume it was linked in the mail thread I
found because a similar issue would affe
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Thomas Lübking
wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 22:47:20 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>>> - CI integration
>>
>>
>> We've addressed that. It can be done with little fuss.
>
> Do you have any hard data on the "little fuss"?
>
> I googled for CI and saw quite so
On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 22:47:20 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
- CI integration
We've addressed that. It can be done with little fuss.
Do you have any hard data on the "little fuss"?
I googled for CI and saw quite some "we need such" comments over the last two years and
also some homebrew
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 20:07:21 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>>
>>> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to
>>> address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a
>>> very high-leve
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 20:07:21 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to
address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a
very high-level description. Could you please provide a list of
functionality that h
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Thomas Lübking
wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:41:18 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>>> - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process
>>> (reasoning) towards gerrit?
>>
>>
>> Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositorie
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> Please read Bens article again. We do this currently and its not working.
>> This is what needs to be replaced. Phabricator seems to support this, or so
>> they say, **and** is does what Gerrit does. So why not use that and have
>> everything
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:54 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2015 11:44:00 Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> Hi Ben,
>> thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the
>> text, and a few further questions as well:
>>
>> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competi
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:53 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote:
>>>
>>> 6) The discussion focuses in highlighting Phabricator's benefits, which
>>> is
>>> understandable from your point of view. However, much of the same things
>>> can be said
When the test system is in place I would like to start my Jenkins integration.
So let me know!
Thanks
Scarlett
On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:55:54 CEST, Jan Kundrát wrote:
The bug you linked to is about something else than scratch
repos as far as I see.
The bug cooked up for asking google about gerrit and scratch repos.
The problem is that pushing into any branch would close a review - I can only
ass
On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:41:18 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
- Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process
(reasoning) towards gerrit?
Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositories are setup
Sorry, I was probably ambiguous here. What I meant is:
"Do w
On 01/21/2015 10:18 PM, Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi,
I'm volunteering KActivities for the test.
Konversation, too.
Cheerio,
Ivan
Cheers,
Eike
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 16:28:20 CEST, Thomas Lübking wrote:
- The major concern about gerrit seems about scratch repos and
I think I found a quite old bug/request on this which might
cross "trivial" approaches w/ scripts? [1]
Otoh, it seems Phabricator doesn't support scratch repos righ
Please read Bens article again. We do this currently and its
not working. This
is what needs to be replaced. Phabricator seems to support this, or so they
say, **and** is does what Gerrit does. So why not use that and
have everything
integrated? It's not as simple as picking a WWW git browser,
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote:
6) The discussion focuses in highlighting Phabricator's benefits, which is
understandable from your point of view. However, much of the same things
can be said about Gerrit as well, especially its backing by a well-known
player, ado
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 11:44:00 Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the
> text, and a few further questions as well:
>
> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to
> address. Some glimpse of this is
On 01/21/2015 05:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hi all,
As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
As someone on the original git infra team, I'm impressed - thanks
for your hard work.
Cheers,
Ben Cooksl
Hi,
I'm volunteering KActivities for the test.
Cheerio,
Ivan
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:53:51 Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote:
> >> 9) I do not know what effort for integration with KDE Indentity you're
> >> referring to. It's a simple LDAP server, and the entire "integration" was
> >> trivial. It'
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Thomas Lübking
wrote:
> Some open questions:
>
> - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process
> (reasoning) towards gerrit?
Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositories are setup
were ignored, despite being made on more the
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>>
>> It contains a detailed summ
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Hi Ben,
Hi Jan,
> thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the
> text, and a few further questions as well:
Certainly.
>
> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to
> address. Some
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Martin Klapetek
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>>
>> It contains a detailed s
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why chang
Some open questions:
- Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process
(reasoning) towards gerrit?
- The major concern about gerrit seems about scratch repos and I think I found a quite
old bug/request on this which might cross "trivial" approaches w/ scripts? [1]
Otoh,
Hello,
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why change is
Thanks Ben for the right proposal.
During the process when the original thread becomes a hell of bickering
people defending his point instead of a concise approach, i almost loose
the faith on results.
I personally tested several of the tools on the last job, where i managed
internally the builds
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing
> systems, why change is
Hi Ben,
thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the
text, and a few further questions as well:
1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to
address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a
very high-level descri
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Luca Beltrame wrote:
> Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
> Hello Ben,
Hi Luca,
>
>> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
>> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
>
> I know I'm much less into coding than other people h
Hi,
I am all for the proposal -- though I would like to use Phabricator for issue
tracking as well, actually. I would also like to propose Calligra/Krita as one
of the test projects.
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 Jan 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As promised in the earlier thread,
Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hello Ben,
> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin
> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code.
I know I'm much less into coding than other people here (which are probably
far more knowledgeable), but in general the proposal
55 matches
Mail list logo
