[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-community
Subject:    Re: [kde-community] Write our own pull request bot?
From:       Loïc Grobol <loic.grobol () gmail ! com>
Date:       2015-09-20 12:26:14
Message-ID: CADtLoSd7dK8pzKSfHFMRk+=7THhiPGG1uUTrCHwsQGBDAYAcug () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 19 September 2015 at 20:14, Eike Hein <hein@kde.org> wrote:
> Making the bot post Phab traffic back to GitHub is a
> fix to the notification problem, but doesn't help with
> getting the requestee to participate unless you make a
> full bridge.
Let's try not to be extreme. If someone was able to post a pull
request, they should be able to switch to Phab if they want to
participate when notified.

> And if you make a full bridge, you run into
> problems with things like converting markup or generally
> limiting both review sites to the subset of shared
> functionality. And then we just locked Phabricator into
> only using functionality supported by a proprietary tool
> we can't change, which means we strapped ourselves to the
> non-free tool after all.
I don't follow here. How would making Phab post at Github/retrieve
GitHub post (if we indeed go this way)
would lock Phab into anything?





-- 
Loïc Grobol.
_______________________________________________
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]