Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-08-25 Thread Manuel Klimek
Hi Zachary, have you tried that recently? If yes, can you re-open https://secure.phabricator.com/D8547 (because that's marked as fixed upstream) Thanks, /Manuel On Fri Aug 22 2014 at 8:36:36 PM Zachary Turner wrote: > Digging up this old thread because I thought of another use case that > woul

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-08-22 Thread Zachary Turner
Digging up this old thread because I thought of another use case that would be nice to support. I would like to be able to attach files generated with git format-patch to Phabricator reviews. I guess it chokes on the header information though and rejects the patch as invalid. On Wed, Jul 9, 201

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-09 Thread Chandler Carruth
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Zachary Turner wrote: > Here's an example of a use case that would be nice to fix: > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D4425 > > It's possible this has already been pointed out earlier in the thread. > The situation was, I forgot to include lldb-commits on the original pa

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-09 Thread Chandler Carruth
On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Chandler Carruth wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky > > wrote: >> >> I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do >> a normal review. >> >> >> Wait what? The ema

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-08 Thread Zachary Turner
Here's an example of a use case that would be nice to fix: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4425 It's possible this has already been pointed out earlier in the thread. The situation was, I forgot to include lldb-commits on the original patch, and then added it subsequently. I could not find any way to

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-06 Thread Manuel Klimek
On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > Chandler Carruth wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky > > wrote: >> >> I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do >> a normal review. >> >> >> Wait what? The ema

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-05 Thread Nick Lewycky
Chandler Carruth wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky mailto:nicho...@mxc.ca>> wrote: I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do a normal review. Wait what? The emails I get from phab *have* an attached patch file. That was a hard requirement

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-05 Thread Alex Rosenberg
On Jul 1, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Alp Toker wrote: >> >>> On 01/07/2014 21:28, Alp Toker wrote: >>> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the website >>> are unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a res

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-04 Thread Aaron Ballman
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:21 AM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: >> >> I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do a >> normal review. > > > Wait what? The emails I get from phab *have* an attached patch file. That > was a h

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-03 Thread Chandler Carruth
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > I don't like the lack attached patch files on the mailing list to do a > normal review. Wait what? The emails I get from phab *have* an attached patch file. That was a hard requirement when we first set up Phabricator. _

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-03 Thread Nick Lewycky
Manuel Klimek wrote: Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or whether there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely perceived as a problem, please speak up, and I'll make sure to pri

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
> On 2014-Jul-01, at 13:02, Sean Silva wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonathan Roelofs > wrote: > > > On 7/1/14, 12:28 PM, Alp Toker wrote: > Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the website are > unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
+cfe-dev, bcc: cfe-commits (you meant cfe-dev, right?) > On 2014-Jul-01, at 04:11, Manuel Klimek wrote: > > Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are not > working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or whether > there are more widespread probl

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Sean Silva
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonathan Roelofs wrote: > > > On 7/1/14, 12:28 PM, Alp Toker wrote: > >> Specifically the problem I've been seeing is that people using the >> website are >> unable to CC mailing list-based developers. As a result I don't get >> copied in on >> responses to my revi

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Chandler Carruth
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote: > Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are > not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or > whether there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely > perceived as a problem, pl

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Sean Silva
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote: > Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are > not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or > whether there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely > perceived as a problem, pl

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Aaron Ballman
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Manuel Klimek wrote: > Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are > not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or whether > there are more widespread problems. If this is more widely perceived as a > problem, ple

Re: [LLVMdev] Usability of phabricator review threads for non-phab-users

2014-07-01 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Manuel Klimek wrote: > Alp noted that the current setup on how phab reviews land on the list are > not working for him. I'd be curious whether his setup is special, or > whether there are more widespread problems. The biggest problem I see is the duplicati