2017-02-02 7:23 GMT-03:00 René J.V. Bertin :
> On Thursday February 2 2017 22:09:34 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>>For those who dismiss decay as an issue - problems with previous
>>Reviewboard upgrades not taking cleanly have resulted in some reviews
>>being damaged, causing their diffs to become unavail
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:37 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Thursday February 2 2017 21:50:38 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
>
>>You missed the point. This "bit rot" is not about disk damage but
>>about software incompatibility. ZFS doesn't help with that...
>
> You mean diffs that no longer apply clean
René J.V. Bertin ha scritto:
> On Thursday February 2 2017 21:50:38 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
>
>> You missed the point. This "bit rot" is not about disk damage but
>> about software incompatibility. ZFS doesn't help with that...
>
> You mean diffs that no longer apply cleanly? In that case you miss
On Thursday February 2 2017 21:50:38 Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
>You missed the point. This "bit rot" is not about disk damage but
>about software incompatibility. ZFS doesn't help with that...
You mean diffs that no longer apply cleanly? In that case you missed our point.
Being able to consult inte
Could this be of any help?
https://www.cloudpipes.com/integrations/phabricator/reviewboard
A paying service, but if the integration allows migration of existing
ReviewBoard stuff into Phabricator a well-timed 2-month trial (or multiple
thereof ;)) might suffice?
There's also this:
https://secure
Hi all,
As a starting point: keeping the software itself running is a
non-starting option from my perspective. It's going to be shutdown.
This is purely to reduce the amount of maintenance effort we have to
expend in keeping our systems running.
There is an enormous amount of software and other s
On Thu, 2 Feb 2017 07:45:15 +1300
Ben Cooksley wrote:
[snip]
>
> I think that we need some cleanup on the old reviews (Albert Astal Cid
> started
> some time ago) and more important strongly tell new users (and old
> users) to use Phabricator. I don't think that anyone wants to lose
> the work, b
On Wednesday February 01 2017 23:03:53 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> You'd be surprised (yes i have a script that actually applies the MRs and
> lots
> of them even very old apply).
Old also doesn't mean unmaintained. I have a number of RRs that I keep rebasing
because I'm still waiting for a gre
El dijous, 2 de febrer de 2017, a les 7:45:15 CET, Ben Cooksley va escriure:
> Anything older than that usually won't apply to the code anymore.
You'd be surprised (yes i have a script that actually applies the MRs and lots
of them even very old apply).
Cheers,
Albert
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Milian Wolff wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 7:56:52 PM CET Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin
> wrote:
>> > On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>>
>> Hi Rene,
>>
>> > >From this point fo
On 2/02/2017 12:41 AM, "Luigi Toscano" wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 10:31:44 CET Francis Herne wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to reply-all and only sent to kdevelop-devel...
>
> -
>
> Hi,
>
> First off, there's a lot of postponed, or at least possibly-useful,
> work on ReviewBoard whi
On 1/02/2017 10:38 PM, "René J.V. Bertin" wrote:
On Wednesday February 1 2017 22:16:50 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>We'd still have to keep the software running, and up to date (to avoid
>it becoming a security risk).
Running yes, but if log-in is disabled at the core and not linked to the
central LDAP
Sorry, forgot to reply-all and only sent to kdevelop-devel...
-
Hi,
First off, there's a lot of postponed, or at least possibly-useful,
work on ReviewBoard which would be lost. Some of this is from newish
contributors who might be discouraged - e.g. the author of
https://git.reviewbo
On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 7:56:52 PM CET Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin
wrote:
> > On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
>
> Hi Rene,
>
> > >From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
> >>
> >>Review
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 10:31:44 CET Francis Herne wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to reply-all and only sent to kdevelop-devel...
>
> -
>
> Hi,
>
> First off, there's a lot of postponed, or at least possibly-useful,
> work on ReviewBoard which would be lost. Some of this is from newish
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 11:52:01 CET Alexander Zhigalin wrote:
> Completely agreeing with Rene, Luigi and Milian.
> All this sounds very sad to me.
> Phabricator is indeed very powerful and better for management stuff.
> But Differential is not even merely comparable to RB by ease of use, mai
On Wednesday February 1 2017 22:16:50 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>We'd still have to keep the software running, and up to date (to avoid
>it becoming a security risk).
Running yes, but if log-in is disabled at the core and not linked to the
central LDAP service or whatever it is you use, what significa
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:26 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Wednesday February 1 2017 20:59:46 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>>
>>While I have yet to test it, Reviewboard does use quite a bit of AJAX
>>and other dynamic resources - so I won't be surprised to find out that
>>the usual mechanisms fo
On Wednesday February 1 2017 20:59:46 Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hi
>
>While I have yet to test it, Reviewboard does use quite a bit of AJAX
>and other dynamic resources - so I won't be surprised to find out that
>the usual mechanisms for creating static copies of sites don't produce
>a workable result.
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Ben Cooksley ha scritto:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin
>> wrote:
>>> On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Hi Rene,
>>
>>>
>>> >From this point forward, communities should be moving
On Tuesday January 31 2017 20:10:42 Luigi Toscano wrote:
>> It will be a complete shutdown of Reviewboard - we'll be archiving it
>> in the event for some reason it becomes necessary to access the data
>> it stores.
>
>Isn't it a way to change the site in static website and keep it alive?
>Checkin
Ben Cooksley ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin
> wrote:
>> On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>
> Hi Rene,
>
>>
>> >From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
>>> Reviewboard to Phabricator for conducting code rev
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
> Hi,
Hi Rene,
>
> >From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
>>Reviewboard to Phabricator for conducting code review. Sysadmin will
>>be announcing a timeli
I apologize, dear brother I looked at you as a friend I talked to him a
little bit agonize his right
2017-01-31 12:36 GMT+02:00 René J.V. Bertin :
> On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> >From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
> >Reviewboard t
On Sunday January 29 2017 08:32:21 Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hi,
>From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
>Reviewboard to Phabricator for conducting code review. Sysadmin will
>be announcing a timeline for the shutdown of Reviewboard in the near
>future.
I hope that shutdown do
Hi everyone,
We've just completed the registration of all mainline repositories
(not including Websites or Sysadmin namespaced ones) on Phabricator.
Thanks go to Luigi Toscano for providing significant assistance with
this process.
>From this point forward, communities should be moving away from
26 matches
Mail list logo
