Re: git: 67783db661f8 - main - CONTRIBUTING: request only one submission type per change

Possibly slightly off-topic, but have we considered some other alternatives
to Phabricator, like Gerrit <https://www.gerritcodereview.com/>?  (My
opinion might be biased as we use Gerrit at $WORK).  I liked the review UI
more (the context representation is cleaner compared to Phabricator and one
can easily navigate between different amendment revisions of one change),
and it is integrated with Git with a customizable workflow (e.g. can have
complex submit requirements, like a change must be approved by a different
person, has to pass certain presubmit workflow, etc.) and is actively
developed and maintained (both Android and Chrome makes heavy use of
Gerrit).

Cheers,

On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:02 PM Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> wrote:

>   Lexi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 08:27:56PM +0100, Lexi Winter wrote:
> L> as a non-committer src contributor, i've discussed this with imp@ quite
> L> a bit and i think this should be phrased more strongly in favour of
> L> using GitHub for commits.
> L>
> L> the current situation is that Phabricator is useless for non-committers
> L> because 1) you have to know who can review your commit, and 2) once your
> L> commit is reviewed, someone has to commit it, and Phabricator doesn't
> L> address this.
>
> The 1) is actually not as bad.  Phabricator has subscribtion hooks, and
> many
> committers have rules installed to get notifications of new reviews that
> touch certain paths of code.
>
> The problem 2), IMHO, equally applies to github and Phabricator.
>
> L> i think it might make more sense to suggest that people submit all
> L> patches via either GitHub or Bugzilla, and only use Phabricator if
> L> specifically asked to.
>
> I don't agree here. Looks like we should address those phabricator
> submissions that go unnoticed due to lack of maintainers of a code.
> I don't think submitting same patch to github will improve visibility.
>
>
> --
> Gleb Smirnoff
>