On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 10:31:44 CET Francis Herne wrote: > 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.
I think that we need some cleanup on the old reviews (Albert Astal Cid started some time ago) and more important strongly tell new users (and old users) to use Phabricator. I don't think that anyone wants to lose the work, but if a review has not been touched in a few months maybe it's time to see it is still interesting. If we start doing this now (or yesterday), the flow of new patches in reviewboard should decrease quickly. > 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. I agree as well that the review information should be kept online. -- Luigi