Hi all.
I am reading https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator/Migration and it says:
"A review of our project management tools [1] was started, including an assessment of our needs and requirements, and a discussion of available options. A request for comment [2] was set up to gauge interest in simplifying our development toolchain and consolidating our tools (gitblit, Gerrit, Jenkins, Bugzilla, RT, Trello, and Mingle) into Phabricator. The result of the RFC was in favor of Phabricator."
The RFC linked is https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Phabricator . It is clearly put wrong. People were not given alternatives. They were told "let's move to Phabricator" and they said "OK, let's do that". I am frustrated. Decide on X, open a "let's do X", get support - this is not how decisions are done.
Would anyone oppose me writing another RFC detailing all the available options (including staying with bugzilla and what cons it has) and posting an URL to it here?
svetlana
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project_management_tools/Review [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project_management_tools/Review
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:06 PM, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
Hi all.
I am reading https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator/Migration and it says:
"A review of our project management tools [1] was started, including an assessment of our needs and requirements, and a discussion of available options. A request for comment [2] was set up to gauge interest in simplifying our development toolchain and consolidating our tools (gitblit, Gerrit, Jenkins, Bugzilla, RT, Trello, and Mingle) into Phabricator. The result of the RFC was in favor of Phabricator."
The RFC linked is https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Phabricator . It is clearly put wrong. People were not given alternatives. They were told "let's move to Phabricator" and they said "OK, let's do that". I am frustrated. Decide on X, open a "let's do X", get support - this is not how decisions are done.
Would anyone oppose me writing another RFC detailing all the available options (including staying with bugzilla and what cons it has) and posting an URL to it here?
The RFC was open for quite some time. You missed the comment period, which is unfortunate, but the decision has already been made and work is already underway to switch.
- Ryan
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 8:06 PM, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
Hi all.
I am reading https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator/Migration and it says:
"A review of our project management tools [1] was started, including an assessment of our needs and requirements, and a discussion of available options. A request for comment [2] was set up to gauge interest in simplifying our development toolchain and consolidating our tools
(gitblit,
Gerrit, Jenkins, Bugzilla, RT, Trello, and Mingle) into Phabricator. The result of the RFC was in favor of Phabricator."
The RFC linked is https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Phabricator . It is clearly put wrong. People were not given alternatives. They were told "let's move to Phabricator" and they said "OK, let's do that". I am frustrated. Decide on X, open a "let's do X", get support - this is not
how
decisions are done.
Would anyone oppose me writing another RFC detailing all the available options (including staying with bugzilla and what cons it has) and
posting
an URL to it here?
The RFC was open for quite some time. You missed the comment period, which is unfortunate, but the decision has already been made and work is already underway to switch.
- Ryan
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
quiddity wrote:
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
Ok, I guess it I am open to anything that can salvage people from some teams' internal tracking in trello. What is an ETA of this migration? How can this be done sooner and how can I help?
svetlana
Hi,
On Monday, August 25, 2014, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
quiddity wrote:
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
Ok, I guess it I am open to anything that can salvage people from some teams' internal tracking in trello. What is an ETA of this migration?
End of September, but we will not hesitate pushing the date if any of the blockers is still unresolved.
How can this be done sooner
We don't want to do it sooner. :)
and how can I help?
Your help resolving tasks at http://fab.wmflabs.org/project/board/31/ is welcome.
Quim Gil wrote:
svetlana wrote:
and how can I help?
Your help resolving tasks at http://fab.wmflabs.org/project/board/31/ is welcome.
Out of curiousity, why is production content hosted on wmflabs? Thought it's a server where folks are just testing new stuff.
svetlana
On Monday, August 25, 2014, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
Quim Gil wrote:
svetlana wrote:
and how can I help?
Your help resolving tasks at http://fab.wmflabs.org/project/board/31/ is welcome.
Out of curiousity, why is production content hosted on wmflabs? Thought it's a server where folks are just testing new stuff.
Because we decided to work on the Phabricator project in Phabricator, to learn in depth how it works and how could we work best with it. Thanks to this some Wikimedians have a learned a lot by now, we can define processes knowing what we are talking about, we can write documentation confidently, and we are going to be hopefully useful to the wave of new users to come by Day 1.
Yes, Labs is not production, but fab.wmflabs.org is being backed up on a daily basis and so far has been up & running without losing any data. It's a compromise that we have accepted happily.
quiddity wrote:
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
I read a few bits, and visited fab.wmflabs.org to test it out. The left sidebar contains these terms: - differential - maniphest - diffusion - audit - projects - applications
Of these, none are familiar, except 'projects'. I clicked that, and was taken to an empty results page. How do you suggest to proceed with using this tool?
svetlana
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:04 PM, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
quiddity wrote:
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
I read a few bits, and visited fab.wmflabs.org to test it out. The left sidebar contains these terms:
- differential
- maniphest
- diffusion
- audit
- projects
- applications
Phabricator likes naming things. Luckily there are descriptions under the names.
Of these, none are familiar, except 'projects'. I clicked that, and was taken to an empty results page. How do you suggest to proceed with using this tool?
The default query shows you projects you're a member of. On the left sidebar you can change that to "All"
-Chad
Chad wrote:
svetlana wrote:
quiddity wrote:
See the navbox, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Project_management_tools_review The RfC is step 4. Steps 1-3 contain what you're looking for.
I read a few bits, and visited fab.wmflabs.org to test it out. The left sidebar contains these terms:
- differential
- maniphest
- diffusion
- audit
- projects
- applications
Phabricator likes naming things.
I think that's confusing and is an entry barrier. Can these be renamed back to something meaningful or have their names hidden entirely? They're /not helping/, even after I remember what each of them does.
That's probably a steeper learning curve at least - not a big problem, but perhaps worth looking into.
Chad wrote:
Luckily there are descriptions under the names.
Ah. I read the descriptions and found one more familiar thing, 'tasks and bugs'. It appears to default to bugs assigned to me - I couldn't figure out how to list all.
Turns out other options are related to code review (OK, just don't need it atm), hosting and browsing repositories (?), Audit (similar to code review; not my thing).
I imagine most people really just want to see a list of projects and a list of open bugs here.
I failed to figure out how to file a new bug, here.
Chad wrote:
svetlana wrote:
Of these, none are familiar, except 'projects'. I clicked that, and was taken to an empty results page. How do you suggest to proceed with using this tool?
The default query shows you projects you're a member of. On the left sidebar you can change that to "All"
Found 'Customize applications' link at the bottom. It took me to a list of pinned applications, which is identical to what is listed in the sidebar and doesn't appear to add any new information.
svetlana
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 01:29:12 +0200, svetlana svetlana@fastmail.com.au wrote:
I read a few bits, and visited fab.wmflabs.org to test it out. The left sidebar contains these terms:
- differential
- maniphest
- diffusion
- audit
- projects
- applications
Phabricator likes naming things.
<
I think that's confusing and is an entry barrier. Can these be renamed back to something meaningful or have their names hidden entirely? They're /not helping/, even after I remember what each of them does.
Naming things "Differential" and "Maniphest" isn't too different from naming them "Gerrit", "Bugzilla", "Trello" or "Mingle".
I've attempted to create a new bug, and use comments.
Apparently I can't reply to comments (quoting the previous folks).?
svetlana
Hi Svetlana,
Note that http://fab.wmflabs.org 's homepage and left column will look different (simpler) in Wikimedia Phabricator on Day 1. Phabricator upstream has added many improvements in this front in the past months. There is a preliminary discussion at http://fab.wmflabs.org/T12
We also discussed the names of tasks and decided to leave them as it is -- see http://fab.wmflabs.org/T119
In Phabricator projects are tags, tags are projects. There is no tree hierarchy, and there are no subprojects or (these might come in a near future, though).
On Tuesday, August 26, 2014, svetlana <svetlana@fastmail.com.au javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','svetlana@fastmail.com.au');> wrote:
I've attempted to create a new bug, and use comments.
Apparently I can't reply to comments (quoting the previous folks).?
Yes, you can. Check the dropdown link at the right of the comment you want to quote. I just documented more answers to your questions at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator/Help
Thank you for these questions. They are useful to improve our user documentation before Day 1. If you (plural) have more questions, they are welcome at the very empty and very ready
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Phabricator/Help
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org