From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rebecca@bluestop.org>
Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom;
 client-ip=96.73.9.1; helo=muon.bluestop.org;
 envelope-from=rebecca@bluestop.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org 
Received: from muon.bluestop.org (muon.bluestop.org [96.73.9.1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 337E721195BD0
 for <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>; Fri,  7 Dec 2018 05:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from muon.bluestop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by muon.bluestop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F072CB5AB;
 Fri,  7 Dec 2018 06:18:11 -0700 (MST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bluestop.org; s=mail;
 t=1544188691; bh=HBUB2lzGanDWl4kpEc1wq/3I+KiykmoW7F7bpuKFWhY=;
 h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From;
 b=jM1LlNlUo21U6PJDLF3DTBACcpcnjdDaPpcIYqbF3H4QSHEwvHrK8WtKVGSjZAmp1
 WnID/K84DLXuQx5U+I2huRsQtzcpgSYCJOq+VmnQEZmczxi139IddvDVN0yiXW8rYi
 ksQqsYgll5LGwypq6FTYplfFs/H+ODT7G2IcH7Qo=
Received: from muon.bluestop.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by muon.bluestop.org (muon.bluestop.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026)
 with ESMTP id HWmiLHYvQkUq; Fri,  7 Dec 2018 06:18:11 -0700 (MST)
Received: from Rebeccas-iPhone.mail (gw.bluestop.org [96.73.9.3])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by muon.bluestop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA;
 Fri,  7 Dec 2018 06:18:10 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 06:11:28 -0700
From: Rebecca Cran <rebecca@bluestop.org>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: "Brian J. Johnson" <brian.johnson@hpe.com>, 
 "=?utf-8?Q?edk2-devel=40lists.01.org?=" <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>, 
 Jeremiah Cox <jerecox@microsoft.com>, stephano
 <stephano.cetola@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <etPan.5c0a72e1.327b23c6.56ce@bluestop.org>
In-Reply-To: <a3bc783a-3c2b-40ea-806c-27fe85876138@redhat.com>
References: <a3bc783a-3c2b-40ea-806c-27fe85876138@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
Subject: Re: my Phabricator findings [was: Research Request]
X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EDK II Development  <edk2-devel.lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/options/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
List-Help: <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 13:17:23 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline


On December 7, 2018 at 5:00:55 AM, Laszlo Ersek (lersek=40redhat.com(mail=
to:lersek=40redhat.com)) wrote:

> To be honest, I'm stumped how Mozilla could adopt (according to the
> article linked at the top) =22Phabricator as the primary code review
> system for =46irefox=22. =20

They previously used Review Board (https://www.reviewboard.org/), which s=
imilarly uses a tool =E2=80=98rbt=E2=80=99 (RB Tools) to post/manage revi=
ews, so it seems their processes are set up to work in such a way.


I can understand that our workflow is different and not a good fit for th=
e model Phabricator uses.






Rebecca