<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Phabricator on vnykmshr</title><link>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/tags/phabricator/</link><description>Recent content in Phabricator on vnykmshr</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/tags/phabricator/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>On Phabricator</title><link>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/on-phabricator/</link><pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.vnykmshr.com/writing/on-phabricator/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;ve been using Phabricator for several months now. Code review happened before Phab too &amp;ndash; we weren&amp;rsquo;t shipping blind. Years of SVN, then Mercurial hosted on Unfuddle for a while. Reviews ran through email threads, commit comments, someone walking over to your desk. It worked. But the review was always a side channel. The diff wasn&amp;rsquo;t a first-class thing. You&amp;rsquo;d commit, someone would look at it, feedback would come through whatever medium was handy, you&amp;rsquo;d iterate, it would go in. Review happened &lt;em&gt;around&lt;/em&gt; the code, not &lt;em&gt;through&lt;/em&gt; a tool built for it.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>