On Monday, 5 January 2015 16:23:15 CEST, Thomas Lübking wrote:
To sum up my understanding:
- Nobody wants to install/use PHP (or, good god, .NET/Mono ;-) on a client.
- Nobody remotely intends to *require* this (but one can oc.
*offer* tools written on any whatsoever exotic requirement)
Phabricator has an equivalent of rbtools/rbt called Arcanist which is
written in PHP. There are AFAIK no other tools for automating working with
Phabricator's code review subsystem.
I claim that requiring PHP or JVM or .NET for each
developers'/contributors' productive work is bad. Jeff's response is that
PHP is not really required because they can just juggle patches by hand and
paste them to web interfaces or pipe to `git am`. While this is technically
correct, I find this logic misleading and say that in absence of tools
which are on-par with Arcanist, PHP is effectively required, and I do find
this situation a downside of Phabricator. I also point out that there are
other tools which do not require a client-side PHP script.
Cheers,
Jan
--
Trojitá, a fast Qt IMAP e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/
