[GHC DevOps Group] The future of Phabricator

Carter Schonwald carter.schonwald at gmail.com
Sun Nov 4 16:08:35 UTC 2018

I’ve found that GitHub encourages git commits as a project journal even
though gits originating prject has a very diff / change set oriented
workflow.  And The latter is a more useful granularity of contribution for
complex prjects like ghc.

On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 10:27 AM Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak at justtesting.org>

> > Am 30.10.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com>:
> >
> > I'm entirely happy to move, provided (1) whatever we move to provides
> the functionality we need, and (2) it's clearly what the community wants
> (considering both current and future contributors). In the past when moving
> to GitHub was brought up, there were a handful of core contributors who
> argued strongly in favour of Phabricator, do we think that's changed? Do we
> have any indication of whether the survey respondents who were
> anti-Phabricator would be pro- or anti-GitLab?
> FWIW, while I still think GitHub is preferable, GitLab would be an
> improvement over Phabricator IMHO.
> Cheers,
> Manuel
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20181104/c82af6bc/attachment.html>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list