On 10/5/21 9:05 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
Hi,
# Proposal
The LLVM Foundation Board of Directors is seeking comment on the current state
of Code Review
within the LLVM Project and its sub-projects. Phabricator is no longer
actively maintained
and we would like to move away from a self-hosted solution, so our goal is to
determine if
GitHub Pull Requests are a good alternative to our current code review tool:
Phabricator.
Specifically we are looking for feedback on:
- What features or properties make Github Pull Requests better than Phabricator?
- What features or properties make Phabricator better than GitHub Pull
Requests?
- What new workflows or process improvements will be possible with GitHub Pull
Requests?
- Which workflows aren’t possible with GitHub Pull Requests?
- Any other information that you think will help the Board of Directors make
the best decision.
# Where to Direct Feedback
Please provide feedback on the Infrastructure Working Group ticket[1]. This
will make
it easier to collect and consolidate the responses. At the end of the comment
period
the Infrastructure Working Group will collect the feedback for further analysis
and summarization.
# Timeline
The timeline for this RFC will be as follows:
- RFC posted on llvm-dev for public review and comment
- 30 days after the date of posting, public comment closes.
Hi,
Just a reminder, please add your comments to the github issue[1] by
November 4.
-Tom
- IWG will have 14 days from closure of public comments to review and summarize
public
comments into a pros and cons list to be present to LLVM Foundation Board
- Foundation Board will have 30 days to make a final decision about using
GitHub Pull Requests
and then communicate a migration plan to the community.
Thank you,
LLVM Foundation Board of Directors
[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-iwg/issues/73
_______________________________________________
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
