[Reviewers] FYI: Phabricator experiment

[Kevin Bullock]

> On Jun 15, 2017, at 11:39, Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> wrote:
> 
> Howdy reviewers (again, since we'd forgotten to add indygreg and smf to the list, sorry about the double-send),
> 
> Aaron and Durham (cc'd) have expressed a feeling that we'd get a lot more reviewer contribution from Facebook employees if we had an option other than review-by-email. I'm more than a little dubious that it'll make a big difference, but in the name of collecting data we agreed to set up a Phabricator instance and try that out, at least for changes that don't require multiple patches[0]. Keeping an eye on it will, of course, be optional, but I'd like it if everyone at least kept an eye out for it when it's ready and gave it a fair examination, so that in a month or two we can decide if the experiment should be continued.

I'm starting the work to set this up on m-s.o, will keep y'all posted as I get it stood up.

I'm wondering how this will interact with our normal review flow as we're experimenting with it. Namely, how will patches get submitted into Phabricator? Does reviewing thru Phabricator mean they _won't_ end up on the list, or are we thinking of having Phabricator ingest patches from the list the way Patchwork does? For us to give it a proper shot, it seems like we need to work out some details so that we're all (or some subset of us are) using it the same way.

We've talked before about integrating a web-based review tool into our workflow, it'll be interesting to see how Phabricator fits the bill.

pacem in terris / мир / शान्ति / ‎‫سَلاَم‬ / 平和
Kevin R. Bullock