Hi, thank you for this short and fresh review. Your help is welcome at
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T597, where we are trying to identify
blockers for using Arcanist, so we can discuss them and address them
effectively.
Meanwhile, some comments here.
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Ricordisamoa <ricordisamoa(a)openmailbox.org>
wrote:
<review>
<rant>
Arcanist has to be manually cloned from Git and added to $PATH. Really?
Having seen how users struggle installing git-review and dependencies in
their environments, I'm not sure this is a bad idea. Plus, I guess it makes
updating to master pretty easy as well?
"Test Plan" is required.
Sounds like a good practice to me. Worst case scenario, type "I didn't test
this patch at all."
".arcconfig" should be automatically
detected on git clone.
I can't review my own revisions.
Neither should you, that is the point of code review. Then again, if there
is no workaround for this, it might be a blocker for urgent Ops deployments
(where we see many self-merged patches) and one-person projects. If this is
the case, please create a blocker for T597 so we can discuss it in detail.
"Lint" and "Unit" are shown as
completely different processes.
Diffs all over the page clutter the UI.
No powerful plain-text Gerrit-like queries.
I have to click "Edit Revision" to add reviewers.
No -2/-1/+1/+2. WTF?
See "Tokens!" below. :) Discuss:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T138
</rant>
<yay>
Tokens!
Comment preview!
Can paste raw diffs!
</yay>
<summary>
Some nice features aren't worth a change of workflow.
</summary>
</review>