Hi > On 14 Dec 2018, at 7:57 pm, Sylvestre Ledru <sle...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > I think we should aim at option b) (updated automatically by bots after > submission to Phabricator) > >
I don’t particularly fancy this idea. Finding yourself with different code on Phabricator and locally is a good way to shoot yourself in the foot. Preventing pushing non-properly formatted code, it’s so easy to properly format your code. Also make you have on extra check on what you’re about to review. Similar to the Google review process. IIRC before anyone is asked to review anything, the submission must pass a set of tests, one of them includes checking the coding style. > We have more and more tools at review phase (clang-format, flake8, eslint, > clang-tidy, codespell, etc) which propose some auto-fixes. > > Currently, the turn around time of the tools is 14m on average which is > usually faster than the reviewer looking at the patch. > If Phabricator provides the capability, we could have the bot automatically > proposing a new patchset on top on the normal one. > The reviewer would look at the updated version. > > It does feel longer that that :) > By doing that, we would save time for everyone. The main drawback would be > that developer would have to retrieve the updated patch > before updating it. > > A big drawback _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
