[Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-18 Thread Quim Gil
We are about to enter the final sprint to migrate Bugzilla and RT to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org. The move from Trello and Mingle is about to start as well. And well, it is time to plan the migration from Gerrit. The first goal is to build a proof of concept based on a sample of repositories

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread MZMcBride
Quim Gil wrote: >We are about to enter the final sprint to migrate Bugzilla and RT to >https://phabricator.wikimedia.org. The move from Trello and Mingle is >about to start as well. And well, it is time to plan the migration from >Gerrit. I'm confused by this e-mail. I don't understand why you're

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread Rjd0060
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:44 AM, MZMcBride wrote: > And, even though it should go without saying, Bugzilla will need to remain > online in a read-only format indefinitely post-migration. > Why would this be necessary, assming everything is properly imported to Phab? Will *every* detail of a BZ

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread Brian Wolff
On Oct 19, 2014 11:52 AM, "Rjd0060" wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:44 AM, MZMcBride wrote: > > > And, even though it should go without saying, Bugzilla will need to remain > > online in a read-only format indefinitely post-migration. > > > > Why would this be necessary, assming everything

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread Andre Klapper
Hi, On Sun, 2014-10-19 at 10:44 -0400, MZMcBride wrote: > Quim Gil wrote: > >We are about to enter the final sprint to migrate Bugzilla and RT to > >https://phabricator.wikimedia.org. The move from Trello and Mingle is > >about to start as well. And well, it is time to plan the migration from > >G

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread Andre Klapper
On Sun, 2014-10-19 at 10:52 -0400, Rjd0060 wrote: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:44 AM, MZMcBride wrote: > > > And, even though it should go without saying, Bugzilla will need to remain > > online in a read-only format indefinitely post-migration. > > > > Why would this be necessary, assming every

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread Quim Gil
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > > I'm confused by this e-mail. I don't understand why you're seemingly > switching to a focus on code review Sorry for the confusion, sometimes it is tricky to find the balance between brevity and clarity. As the description of https://phabri

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-19 Thread MZMcBride
Rjd0060 wrote: >On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:44 AM, MZMcBride wrote: >> And, even though it should go without saying, Bugzilla will need to >>remain >> online in a read-only format indefinitely post-migration. > >Why would this be necessary, assming everything is properly imported to >Phab? > >Will

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-20 Thread Quim Gil
In fact... On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Quim Gil wrote: > > As the description of https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T18 says, The > Code Review migration to Phabricator is quite orthogonal to the RT and > Bugzilla migrations, and we should start planning for it now. We need to > request reso

Re: [Wikitech-l] Phabricator for code review (defining the plan)

2014-10-21 Thread Gergo Tisza
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Brian Wolff wrote: > Well there are a lot of links to it first of all. > For which a redirect is a much better solution than sending the reader to a dead site and leaving them to figure out it's dead. At least for direct bug references it should be easy to set up