Page MenuHomePhabricator

alnet82 (Alex)
UserEmail Not Verified

Projects

User does not belong to any projects.

Today

  • Clear sailing ahead.

Tomorrow

  • Clear sailing ahead.

Saturday

  • Clear sailing ahead.

User Details

User Since
Aug 6 2015, 1:09 PM (360 w, 5 h)
Availability
Available

Recent Activity

Jan 20 2016

alnet82 updated the task description for T10181: Create audit requests based on a package commits.
Jan 20 2016, 2:05 PM · Restricted Project, Audit, Owners, Herald, Feature Request
alnet82 updated the task description for T10181: Create audit requests based on a package commits.
Jan 20 2016, 12:26 PM · Restricted Project, Audit, Owners, Herald, Feature Request
alnet82 created T10181: Create audit requests based on a package commits.
Jan 20 2016, 7:35 AM · Restricted Project, Audit, Owners, Herald, Feature Request

Jan 10 2016

alnet82 updated the task description for T10090: Updating Herald rule throws Unhandled Exception.
Jan 10 2016, 7:31 AM · Herald, Bug Report

Jan 7 2016

alnet82 added a comment to T10090: Updating Herald rule throws Unhandled Exception.

I upgraded a 6 month old installation to HEAD. Can it be related? Didn't experience any other issues.

Jan 7 2016, 1:12 PM · Herald, Bug Report

Jan 6 2016

alnet82 created T10090: Updating Herald rule throws Unhandled Exception.
Jan 6 2016, 3:36 PM · Herald, Bug Report

Aug 9 2015

alnet82 added a comment to T9091: Audit approval flow needs more actions.

@chad, thanks for the comments. There is no doubt that Differential mode is a proffered way to do a code review.
However it has some issues:

  1. Using manually uploaded diffs is nice, but not an option for a daily routine.
  2. While Arcanist is not hard to use, it requires though some magic to make it work with PyCharm, Eclispe or any other IDE being used. It should be convenient for people to use and hidden as much as possible. If you could just replace "arc" with "hg" that would be a perfect match.
Aug 9 2015, 5:32 AM · Restricted Project, Audit
alnet82 added a comment to T9091: Audit approval flow needs more actions.

@eadler - yes T731 looks similar.
@chad, we use only Audits at this point. The reason we don't use pre-commit workflow is mainly due the fact that we didn't want to introduce a new Source Code Control system, besides what we already use - mercurial. Our team works on many platforms and each developer uses its own IDE, so at this point we didn't want to convert everyone to Arcanist.
In our current flow everyone that want his commits to be reviewed, uploads them to a "review" branch. After a successful review, the branch is merged with the master branch.
Additional thing I find lacking is a way to compare ("diff") a series of commits. Think of a following flow:

  1. Alice pushes commit A and sets Bob as Auditor.
  2. Bob comments on commit A and rejects the commit.
  3. Alice pushes commit B to address Bob's comments.
Aug 9 2015, 5:02 AM · Restricted Project, Audit

Aug 6 2015

alnet82 created T9091: Audit approval flow needs more actions.
Aug 6 2015, 1:34 PM · Restricted Project, Audit