Phabricator: All repositories registered - upcoming workflow changes

[Francis Herne]

Sorry, forgot to reply-all and only sent to kdevelop-devel...

-------------

Hi,

First off, there's a lot of postponed, or at least possibly-useful,
work on ReviewBoard which would be lost. Some of this is from newish
contributors who might be discouraged - e.g. the author of
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/129589/ mentioned on IRC the other
day that he's hoping to complete it at some point.

For already-committed work:

Even if the mail-archiving infrastructure was in a useful state, this
would be inconvenient - there are more than a *thousand* REVIEW: tags in
kdev* project commits, plus several comments with "see <review url>".

Many mailing lists aren't logged at all, there's no internal
search with only patchy Google indexing, and 'browsing' the archive
means clicking through arbitrarily-grouped mails by date with minimal
threading. That's not merely inconvenient, it's going to cause a
catastrophic loss of information.

Please reconsider.

-Francis

On Wed, 1 Feb 2017 07:56:52 +1300
Ben Cooksley <bcooksley at kde.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin
> <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:  
> > On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >
> > Hi,    
> 
> Hi Rene,
>   
> >    
> > >From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
> >>Reviewboard to Phabricator for conducting code review. Sysadmin will
> >>be announcing a timeline for the shutdown of Reviewboard in the near
> >>future.    
> >
> > I hope that shutdown doesn't mean complete disconnect; it would
> > probably be a loss of as-yet unknown importance if all code reviews
> > become unavailable.
> >
> > I'll miss ReviewBoard. Phabrithingy may be more powerful and
> > versatile, but RB had its advantages too which could be why it's
> > still being used (quite a lot, as far as I can see) and hasn't been
> > integrated with KDE's own IDE yet.    
> 
> It will be a complete shutdown of Reviewboard - we'll be archiving it
> in the event for some reason it becomes necessary to access the data
> it stores.
> 
> In most cases mailing lists should have the history of reviews in
> their archives, so those will continue to be accessible through list
> archives in the long run.
> 
>   
> >
> > R.    
> 
> Cheers,
> Ben