[Reviewers] FYI: Phabricator experiment

[Sean Farley]

Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> writes:

>> On Jun 15, 2017, at 13:23, Kevin Bullock <kbullock at ringworld.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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.
>
> I was figuring we'd have Phabricator send emails to the list, but if you wanted to use the experimental Phabricator workflow, you'd have to submit /to Phabricator/. Nobody is building the tool I really want, which would parse emails and try to interpret comments-on-email-diffs and plunk them back into a web-based tool. A man can dream....

There's talk of writing that here at Bitbucket ... but it's so far away
at this point. Grant (he was at the sprint on the first day) is working
on it, fwiw.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 800 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial-reviewers/attachments/20170615/e2fc8c46/attachment.asc>