On Monday, May 5, 2014, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
OK, so I'm sorry if this information is duplicated anywhere, but between the Project Management Tools review page, the Phabricator RFC, the various sub-pages of the RFC, and the content on the Phabricator instance itself, it would take me at least a couple of hours to organize my thoughts.
This is perfectly understandable. In just 2-3 weeks there has been an explosion of content in addition to all the content that was compiled before the RfC. There is a high % of signal, not much noise. Things will evetually settle.
I created https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Phabricator/versus_Bugzi... consolidate the relevant information for bug reporters. It would be useful to do the same for code contributors and reviewers, but I'm not qualified. Any volunteers?
So I'll just ask directly:
Phabricator still does not work directly with Git, right? Or has that been implemented since I last checked? If not, what is the planned workaround for Phabricator?
Relevant discussion at
Find way to use Differential with plain git (i.e.: without requiring arc) http://fab.wmflabs.org/T207
The default workflow is to use arcanist to merge the code into Git directly. Does that handle merge conflicts? What is the rebase process?
It's not that I'm opposed to the new system. I'm just confused as to what the new workflow would actually be.