Uninstall Differential (Phabricator application)
Closed, ResolvedPublic
Actions

Assigned To

Authored By

	Aklapper
	Feb 28 2023, 9:47 PM

Description

See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab_consultation

TODO:

Resolve nearly all subtasks of T330797 (note: migrating canonical Diffusion repos is not a hard blocker - after uninstalling Differential folks can still clone Diffusion repos but they cannot commit into Diffusion repos anymore)
First set Can Use Application to Administrators on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/applications/view/PhabricatorDifferentialApplication/

differential_app_config.png (184×452 px, 20 KB)

Uninstall in the UI via https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/applications/view/PhabricatorDifferentialApplication/
Remove from default settings via https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/repos/phabricator/deployment/-/merge_requests/28
Deploy new default settings
Check that "Local Config" at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/config/edit/phabricator.uninstalled-applications/ reflects this

Details

	Title	Reference	Author	Source Branch	Dest Branch
	Remove unused "Differential" application from default settings	repos/phabricator/deployment!33	aklapper	T330797rmDifferential	wmf/stable
	Remove unused "Differential" application from default settings	repos/phabricator/deployment!28	aklapper	T330797removeDifferential	wmf/stable

Customize query in GitLab

Related Objects
Search...

Status	Assigned	Task
Open	None	T330844 Avoid to have too much different places (like Gerrit, GitHub, Differential, GitLab, ...) where code review may take place to help newcomers
Resolved	Aklapper	T342041 Remove custom src/customfields/DifferentialApplyPatchWithOnlyGitField.php
Resolved	Aklapper	T330797 Uninstall Differential (Phabricator application)
Resolved	Aklapper	T191182 Migrate active repositories in Phabricator Differential to GitLab
Resolved	thcipriani	T191373 Move Scap development from Differential to Gerrit
Resolved	Paladox	T215706 Fix scap-beta-deb jobs after moving Scap to Gerrit
Resolved	MarcoAurelio	T191374 Move OOjs Router code review from Differential to Gerrit
Resolved	dduvall	T200452 Move Blubber repo and CR to Gerrit
Resolved	faidon	T203108 Create keyholder gerrit repo
Resolved	Krinkle	T203110 Move tools-perflogbot repository to Gerrit
Resolved	Krenair	T204702 Move Thumbor Plugins code review from Differential to Gerrit
Resolved	Legoktm	T210820 Migrate Differential repo rWIEG back to Gerrit wikimedia/iegreview.git
Resolved	Ottomata	T212420 Move KafkaSSE development from Differential to Github
Declined	None	T212421 Move Wikibase Data Model JavaScript development from Differential to Gerrit
Resolved	hashar	T216483 Move scap-vagrant to Gerrit
Resolved	MarcoAurelio	T219703 Move `tool-ldap` from Differential to Gerrit
Declined	None	T224676 Add Gerrit support to Striker (toolsadmin)
Resolved	kaldari	T247284 Improve OCR: Move ws-google-ocr repository to Gerrit
Declined	None	T252910 Move development of `tool-versions.git` from Differential to Gerrit
Resolved	bd808	T315706 Migrate existing Striker created Diffusion repos to GitLab
Resolved	hashar	T321350 Phabricator translations can no more be received due to decommissioning of git-ssh
Resolved	brennen	T346937 GitLab Private Repository Request for: Wikimedia Stewards
Resolved	brennen	T346924 Create new GitLab project group: stewards
Resolved	Aklapper	T349847 Delete technischewuensche tool code repository in Diffusion
Resolved	None	T350352 Check technischewuensche tool code and publish in a public repo
Resolved	thcipriani	T351321 Migrate R2115 Diffusion repo to 1password
Resolved	thcipriani	T290337 Migrate from pws gpg to 1password
Resolved	Aklapper	T348115 Uninstall Harbormaster (Phabricator application)
Resolved	Aklapper	T351105 Triage and close remaining open patches in Differential
Resolved	Aklapper	T351585 Disable Differential related Herald rules

Event Timeline

Aklapper changed the task status from Open to Stalled.Feb 28 2023, 9:47 PM

Aklapper created this task.

Aklapper added a subtask: T191182: Migrate active repositories in Phabricator Differential to GitLab.

I wonder if Evan Priestley ever even imagined such a situation, which is somewhat post-apocalyptic, premising that Differential was the first component of Phabricator, as far as I can have seen from its history. Let's see what happens, I think.

In T330797#8654891, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

I wonder if Evan Priestley ever even imagined such a situation, which is somewhat post-apocalyptic, premising that Differential was the first component of Phabricator, as far as I can have seen from its history. Let's see what happens, I think.

What's the disappointing is Phabricator does not have a self-contained DevOps workflow that satisfy our demend (e.g. lacking a full-featured CI). See T217901: Evaluate Phabricator Harbormaster.

Peachey88 subscribed.Mar 1 2023, 7:52 AM

I honestly agree that GitLab is ways more simple in CI jobs and to welcome community projects, since it's generally "repository-centric", with CI specifically "container-centric". Indeed GitLab CI has a throwaway logic on your CI infrastructure.

Phabricator instead is generally "organization-centric", with CI specifically "ssh-centric". So I love that with Harbormaster I can implement low-level things directly over SSH to my bare metal hosts, without the need of any containerization. And it works very well as I tried to document at my best here:

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Phabricator_Administrator%27s_Handbook/Continuous_integration

I honestly believe that 20 minutes of training in knowing both platforms could have helped to avoid to share less superficial feedbacks from T217901. And I honestly think that maintaining Phabricator in a "non-usual" way with a core component disabled could just create a more complicated environment for the people who see Phabricator, knows Phabricator, land on Phabricator, they would like to use it /without/ the need of any external tool, and instead will be now forced to do avoid native workflows and adopt external tools.

In short, I strongly don't agree to ban the community from using Phabricator to its potential, even if they are 2 users.

Instead, I would suggest to concentrate in migrating the well-known core MediaWiki components from the proprietary BitBucket platform, and bring them to GitLab. BitBucket is a serious underestimated issue, causing true dispersion, slowdown in the development of crucial components, and that causes an extra alien workflow involving truly alien platforms.

Lets keep this task on topic and in its scope which is disabling Differential.

Soapboxing about migrating everything to Gitlab or not has has already occurred else and that has been the chosen direction.

What I mean is, please create a parent task like "Unifying development tools" or whatever can help in clarifying the purpose here (now it's not really evident from the Task description). I suggest this since, then, I would like to create a sub-task called Abandon Bitbucket™ to try to help in following the chosen direction.

Aklapper updated the task description. (Show Details)Mar 1 2023, 8:27 AM

In T330797#8655614, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

create a parent task like "Unifying development tools" or whatever can help in clarifying the purpose here

Indeed. Sorry for that! I added https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab_consultation (from 30 months ago) to the task description.

I would like to create a sub-task called Abandon Bitbucket™ to try to help in following the chosen direction.

Wikimedia does not host a Bitbucket instance. :)

In T330797#8655634, @Aklapper wrote:

Indeed. Sorry for that! I added https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab_consultation (from 30 months ago) to the task description.

Thanks but the mentioned GitLab page does not explain the purpose of this Task, as far as I can see. That page describes very well the benefits of GitLab, the disadvantages of Gerrit, and it does not cover why somebody should disable a core component of WMF Phabricator. This task is still with an unclear background purpose, for me. And it's very difficult to contribute in any way for me in this discussion without understanding the mentioned wider "direction".

Wikimedia does not host a Bitbucket™ instance

It seems you mean the direction is "Disable WMF services that are little used". This seems more an opinion than a direction, since AFAIK the whole discussion always has been about "avoiding tool dispersion" as I can understand from WMF blog posts from @zeljkofilipin (I'm not able to find that article now).

Last months three people still used Differential. We shall not have four different places (Gerrit, GitHub, Differential, GitLab) where code review may take place to confuse the hell out of new technical contributors, but ideally one place (GitLab) in the long run. Thus we should switch off Differential.

In T330797#8655822, @Aklapper wrote:

Wikimedia does not host a Bitbucket™ instance
Gerrit, GitHub, Differential, GitLab

We mention GitHub since WMF has a GitHub "instance" (?) - Trust me, I ask this since I just don't truly understand why the whole purpose is not involving in any way Bitbucket™ but involves GitHub.

I mention Github because some code repos are canonically hosted on Github. And the canonical (= not-mirrored) repo location defines where the code review of patches happens for that repo.

Why do you repeatedly mention Bitbucket? I cannot follow why that is mentioned.

hashar updated the task description. (Show Details)Mar 1 2023, 10:09 AM

valerio.bozzolan mentioned this in T330844: Avoid to have too much different places (like Gerrit, GitHub, Differential, GitLab, ...) where code review may take place to help newcomers.Mar 1 2023, 10:18 AM

valerio.bozzolan added a parent task: T330844: Avoid to have too much different places (like Gerrit, GitHub, Differential, GitLab, ...) where code review may take place to help newcomers.

In T330797#8655854, @Aklapper wrote:

Why do you repeatedly mention Bitbucket? I cannot follow why that is mentioned.

Yep. I mention Bitbucket since, from the perspective of a newcomer, it's surely a primary tool at the moment, and this is problematic. I will expand such discussion there:

T330846: Help community projects on Bitbucket™ to evaluate the adoption of something less external and libre (for example Wikimedia GitLab)

Dzahn changed the status of subtask T191182: Migrate active repositories in Phabricator Differential to GitLab from In Progress to Open.Mar 23 2023, 5:43 PM

I landed here again and I admit that this makes so sad, frustrated and confused. Apologies for my emotional context but I see this Task like, someone wants to shoot a minority, because their workflow bothers the majority.

Again, thank you all, for stop mentioning the "GitLab consultation" in unclear non-punctual ways, to justify invasive and honestly overbearing actions like the kill of core components as Differentials is - that nothing has to do with GitLab adoption, does not impede GitLab adoption, and surely "does not impede new Wikimedia contributors" that can just concentrate in contributing in already-existing repositories that are in other places.

Feel free to reopen after it's possible to discuss a clear, neutral and non-biased reason (e.g. not from people that hates Differentials, not from people that hates the learning curve of Differentials, not from people that never adopted Differentials in production successfully, not from people that works in Wikimedia Foundation and that is in charge of documenting internal tools) (for example: welcome independent volunteers, welcome stakeholders from other Wikimedia Chapters) in order to seriously discuss this, understand the risks, understanding that this is an invasive request.

Again, some community tools die just because there is no maintenance, or something and this is OK. But here, we want to kill an actively developed tool (since https://we.phorge.it/ exists) only because the majority want that. As if this "niche workflow" could jeopardize all other workflows. That doesn't make sense at all, and again, even if true, it's not one of the good reasons to kill active tools loved by niche volunteers.

Since I don't like negative feedback, my proactive proposed solution is just:

→ Stop promoting Differentials in Wikimedia Foundation (good news: we have already done it - so, everyone is happy)

I kindly ask to respect this tool, respect this workflow, respect its community (that all the known metrics already indicate as killed successfully - fantastico!) and just go ahead with GitLab if you love it, or go ahead with Gerrit if you love it, and ignoring this component if you want to ignore it.

fyi, regardless of how one feels about differential, there are already no more active repositories on Phabricator.

And just in general we don't think it's good to have too many different places for storing git repos. If it was for my personal opinion we would stop supporting github too.