mirror of
https://we.phorge.it/source/phorge.git
synced 2024-11-18 21:02:41 +01:00
Merge branch 'docs2'
This commit is contained in:
commit
0245b6cdf7
16 changed files with 198 additions and 148 deletions
|
@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ development install for open tasks in the "Bootcamp" project which are owned by
|
||||||
"Up For Grabs". These are small-to-medium-sized bugs and projects intended to
|
"Up For Grabs". These are small-to-medium-sized bugs and projects intended to
|
||||||
introduce new contributors to the codebase.
|
introduce new contributors to the codebase.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Required Reading =
|
= Suggested Reading =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
You should read the relevant coding convention documents before you submit a
|
You should read the relevant coding convention documents before you submit a
|
||||||
change and make sure you're following the project guidelines:
|
change and make sure you're following the project guidelines:
|
||||||
|
@ -33,17 +33,3 @@ change and make sure you're following the project guidelines:
|
||||||
- @{article:General Coding Standards} (for all languages)
|
- @{article:General Coding Standards} (for all languages)
|
||||||
- @{article:PHP Coding Standards} (for PHP)
|
- @{article:PHP Coding Standards} (for PHP)
|
||||||
- @{article:Javascript Coding Standards} (for Javascript)
|
- @{article:Javascript Coding Standards} (for Javascript)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Philosophy =
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Phabricator philosophy is simple tools that work well. Performance,
|
|
||||||
reliability, and ease of use are of paramount importance. This does not exclude
|
|
||||||
a rich featureset, but adding features shouldn't compromise these pillars.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
One of Phabricator's main strengths is that it's pretty fast, but it got there
|
|
||||||
by accepting only patches which are also pretty fast and reverting out a bunch
|
|
||||||
of garbage that was really slow. Accepting a few slow patches undoes all this
|
|
||||||
work, so you need to be prepared to defend the performance of your patches. The
|
|
||||||
best way you can do this is to do your homework and come armed with concrete
|
|
||||||
performance measurements and information (XHProf profiles, EXPLAIN for query
|
|
||||||
plans, etc.)
|
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
|
||||||
@title Please Please Please
|
@title Please Please Please
|
||||||
@group flavortext
|
@group flavortext
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Please read this document.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
When you send a message that says "I got an error when I tried to do something":
|
When you send a message that says "I got an error when I tried to do something":
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Please Please Please =
|
= Please Please Please =
|
||||||
|
|
60
src/docs/flavortext/project_history.diviner
Normal file
60
src/docs/flavortext/project_history.diviner
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
||||||
|
@title Phabricator Project History
|
||||||
|
@group flavortext
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A riveting tale of adventure. In this document, I refer to worldly and
|
||||||
|
sophisticated engineer Evan Priestley as "I", which is only natural as I am he.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This document is mostly just paragraph after paragraph of self-aggrandizement.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= In The Beginning =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I wrote the original version of Differential in one night at a Facebook
|
||||||
|
Hackathon in April or May 2007, along with Luke Shepard. I joined the company in
|
||||||
|
April and code review was already an established and mostly-mandatory part of
|
||||||
|
the culture, but it happened over email and was inefficient and hard to keep
|
||||||
|
track of. I remember feeling like I was spending a lot of time waiting for code
|
||||||
|
review to happen, which was a major motivator for building the tool.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The original name of the tool was "Diffcamp". Some time earlier there had been
|
||||||
|
an attempt to create a project management tool that was a sort of hybrid between
|
||||||
|
Trac and Basecamp called "Traccamp". Since we were writing the code review tool
|
||||||
|
at the height of the brief popularity Traccamp enjoyed, we integrated and called
|
||||||
|
the new tool Diffcamp even though it had no relation to Basecamp. Traccamp fell
|
||||||
|
by the wayside shortly thereafter and was eventually removed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
However, Diffcamp didn't share its fate. We spent some more time working on it
|
||||||
|
and got good enough to win hearts and minds over emailing diffs around and was
|
||||||
|
soon the de facto method of code review at Facebook.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= The Long Bloat =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For the next two and a half years, Diffcamp grew mostly organically and gained a
|
||||||
|
number of features like inline commenting, CLI support and git support (Facebook
|
||||||
|
was 100% SVN in early 2007 but 90%+ of Engineers worked primarily in git with
|
||||||
|
SVN bridging by 2010). As these patches were contributed pretty much randomly,
|
||||||
|
it also gained a lot of performance problems, usability issues, and bugs.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Through 2007 and 2008 I worked mostly on frontend and support infrastructure;
|
||||||
|
among other things, I wrote a static resource management system called Haste. In
|
||||||
|
2009 I worked on the Facebook Lite site, where I built the Javelin Javascript
|
||||||
|
library and an MVC-flavored framework called Alite.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
But by early 2010, Diffcamp was in pretty bad shape. Two years of having random
|
||||||
|
features grafted onto it without real direction had left it slow and difficult
|
||||||
|
to use. Internal feedback on the tool was pretty negative, with a lot of
|
||||||
|
complaints about performance and stability. The internal XTools team had made
|
||||||
|
inroads at fixing these problems in late 2009, but they were stretched thin and
|
||||||
|
the tool had become a sprawling landscape of architectural and implementation
|
||||||
|
problems.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Differential =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I joined the new Dev Tools team around February 2010 and took over Diffcamp. I
|
||||||
|
renamed it to Differential, moved it to a new Alite-based infrastructure with
|
||||||
|
Javelin, and started making it somewhat less terrible. I eventually wrote
|
||||||
|
Diffusion and build Herald to replace a very difficult-to-use predecessor. These
|
||||||
|
tools were less negatively received than the older versions. By December 2010 I
|
||||||
|
started open sourcing them; Haste became //Celerity// and Alite became
|
||||||
|
//Aphront//. I wrote Maniphest to track open issues with the project in January
|
||||||
|
or February and we open sourced Phabricator in late April, shortly after I left
|
||||||
|
Facebook.
|
123
src/docs/flavortext/soon_static_resources.diviner
Normal file
123
src/docs/flavortext/soon_static_resources.diviner
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
|
||||||
|
@title Things You Should Do Soon: Static Resources
|
||||||
|
@group flavortext
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Over time, you'll write more JS and CSS and eventually need to put systems in
|
||||||
|
place to manage it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Manage Dependencies Automatically =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The naive way to add static resources to a page is to include them at the top
|
||||||
|
of the page, before rendering begins, by enumerating filenames. Facebook used to
|
||||||
|
work like that:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
COUNTEREXAMPLE
|
||||||
|
<?php
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
require_js('js/base.js');
|
||||||
|
require_js('js/utils.js');
|
||||||
|
require_js('js/ajax.js');
|
||||||
|
require_js('js/dialog.js');
|
||||||
|
// ...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This was okay for a while but had become unmanageable by 2007. Because
|
||||||
|
dependencies were managed completely manually and you had to explicitly list
|
||||||
|
every file you needed in the right order, everyone copy-pasted a giant block
|
||||||
|
of this stuff into every page. The major problem this created was that each page
|
||||||
|
pulled in way too much JS, which slowed down frontend performance.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We moved to a system (called //Haste//) which declared JS dependencies in the
|
||||||
|
files using a docblock-like header:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
/**
|
||||||
|
* @provides dialog
|
||||||
|
* @requires utils ajax base
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We annotated files manually, although theoretically you could use static
|
||||||
|
analysis instead (we couldn't realistically do that, our JS was pretty
|
||||||
|
unstructured). This allowed us to pull in the entire dependency chain of
|
||||||
|
component with one call:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
require_static('dialog');
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
...instead of copy-pasting every dependency.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Include When Used =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The other part of this problem was that all the resources were required at the
|
||||||
|
top of the page instead of when they were actually used. This meant two things:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- you needed to include every resource that //could ever// appear on a page;
|
||||||
|
- if you were adding something new to 2+ pages, you had a strong incentive to
|
||||||
|
put it in base.js.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
So every page pulled in a bunch of silly stuff like the CAPTCHA code (because
|
||||||
|
there was one obscure workflow involving unverified users which could
|
||||||
|
theoretically show any user a CAPTCHA on any page) and every random thing anyone
|
||||||
|
had stuck in base.js.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
We moved to a system where JS and CSS tags were output **after** page rendering
|
||||||
|
had run instead (they still appeared at the top of the page, they were just
|
||||||
|
prepended rather than appended before being output to the browser -- there are
|
||||||
|
some complexities here, but they are beyond the immediate scope), so
|
||||||
|
require_static() could appear anywhere in the code. Then we moved all the
|
||||||
|
require_static() calls to be proximate to their use sites (so dialog rendering
|
||||||
|
code would pull in dialog-related CSS and JS, for example, not any page which
|
||||||
|
might need a dialog), and split base.js into a bunch of smaller files.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Packaging =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The biggest frontend performance killer in most cases is the raw number of HTTP
|
||||||
|
requests, and the biggest hammer for addressing it is to package related JS
|
||||||
|
and CSS into larger files, so you send down all the core JS code in one big file
|
||||||
|
instead of a lot of smaller ones. Once the other groundwork is in place, this is
|
||||||
|
a relatively easy change. We started with manual package definitions and
|
||||||
|
eventually moved to automatic generation based on production data.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Caches and Serving Content =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
In the simplest implementation of static resources, you write out a raw JS tag
|
||||||
|
with something like ##src="/js/base.js"##. This will break disastrously as you
|
||||||
|
scale, because clients will be running with stale versions of resources. There
|
||||||
|
are bunch of subtle problems (especially once you have a CDN), but the big one
|
||||||
|
is that if a user is browsing your site as you push/deploy, their client will
|
||||||
|
not make requests for the resources they already have in cache, so even if your
|
||||||
|
servers respond correctly to If-None-Match (ETags) and If-Modified-Since
|
||||||
|
(Expires) the site will appear completely broken to everyone who was using it
|
||||||
|
when you push a breaking change to static resources.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The best way to solve this problem is to version your resources in the URI,
|
||||||
|
so each version of a resource has a unique URI:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
rsrc/af04d14/js/base.js
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
When you push, users will receive pages which reference the new URI so their
|
||||||
|
browsers will retrieve it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**But**, there's a big problem, once you have a bunch of web frontends:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
While you're pushing, a user may make a request which is handled by a server
|
||||||
|
running the new version of the code, which delivers a page with a new resource
|
||||||
|
URI. Their browser then makes a request for the new resource, but that request
|
||||||
|
is routed to a server which has not been pushed yet, which delivers an old
|
||||||
|
version of the resource. They now have a poisoned cache: old resource data for
|
||||||
|
a new resource URI.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
You can do a lot of clever things to solve this, but the solution we chose at
|
||||||
|
Facebook was to serve resources out of a database instead of off disk. Before a
|
||||||
|
push begins, new resources are written to the database so that every server is
|
||||||
|
able to satisfy both old and new resource requests.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This also made it relatively easy to do processing steps (like stripping
|
||||||
|
comments and whitespace) in one place, and just insert a minified/processed
|
||||||
|
version of CSS and JS into the database.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
= Reference Implementation: Celerity =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Some of the ideas discussed here are implemented in Phabricator's //Celerity//
|
||||||
|
system, which is essentially a simplified version of the //Haste// system used
|
||||||
|
by Facebook.
|
|
@ -12,125 +12,6 @@ Then you can come back and read about these things. These are basically some
|
||||||
problems you'll probably eventually encounter when building a web application
|
problems you'll probably eventually encounter when building a web application
|
||||||
that might be good to start thinking about now.
|
that might be good to start thinking about now.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Static Resources: JS and CSS =
|
= Things You Should Do Soon =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Over time, you'll write more JS and CSS and eventually need to put systems in
|
- @{article:Things You Should Do Soon: Static Resources}
|
||||||
place to manage it.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
== Manage Dependencies Automatically ==
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The naive way to add static resources to a page is to include them at the top
|
|
||||||
of the page, before rendering begins, by enumerating filenames. Facebook used to
|
|
||||||
work like that:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
COUNTEREXAMPLE
|
|
||||||
<?php
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
require_js('js/base.js');
|
|
||||||
require_js('js/utils.js');
|
|
||||||
require_js('js/ajax.js');
|
|
||||||
require_js('js/dialog.js');
|
|
||||||
// ...
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This was okay for a while but had become unmanageable by 2007. Because
|
|
||||||
dependencies were managed completely manually and you had to explicitly list
|
|
||||||
every file you needed in the right order, everyone copy-pasted a giant block
|
|
||||||
of this stuff into every page. The major problem this created was that each page
|
|
||||||
pulled in way too much JS, which slowed down frontend performance.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We moved to a system (called //Haste//) which declared JS dependencies in the
|
|
||||||
files using a docblock-like header:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
/**
|
|
||||||
* @provides dialog
|
|
||||||
* @requires utils ajax base
|
|
||||||
*/
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We annotated files manually, although theoretically you could use static
|
|
||||||
analysis instead (we couldn't realistically do that, our JS was pretty
|
|
||||||
unstructured). This allowed us to pull in the entire dependency chain of
|
|
||||||
component with one call:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
require_static('dialog');
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
...instead of copy-pasting every dependency.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
== Include When Used ==
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The other part of this problem was that all the resources were required at the
|
|
||||||
top of the page instead of when they were actually used. This meant two things:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- you needed to include every resource that //could ever// appear on a page;
|
|
||||||
- if you were adding something new to 2+ pages, you had a strong incentive to
|
|
||||||
put it in base.js.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
So every page pulled in a bunch of silly stuff like the CAPTCHA code (because
|
|
||||||
there was one obscure workflow involving unverified users which could
|
|
||||||
theoretically show any user a CAPTCHA on any page) and every random thing anyone
|
|
||||||
had stuck in base.js.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We moved to a system where JS and CSS tags were output **after** page rendering
|
|
||||||
had run instead (they still appeared at the top of the page, they were just
|
|
||||||
prepended rather than appended before being output to the browser -- there are
|
|
||||||
some complexities here, but they are beyond the immediate scope), so
|
|
||||||
require_static() could appear anywhere in the code. Then we moved all the
|
|
||||||
require_static() calls to be proximate to their use sites (so dialog rendering
|
|
||||||
code would pull in dialog-related CSS and JS, for example, not any page which
|
|
||||||
might need a dialog), and split base.js into a bunch of smaller files.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
== Packaging ==
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The biggest frontend performance killer in most cases is the raw number of HTTP
|
|
||||||
requests, and the biggest hammer for addressing it is to package related JS
|
|
||||||
and CSS into larger files, so you send down all the core JS code in one big file
|
|
||||||
instead of a lot of smaller ones. Once the other groundwork is in place, this is
|
|
||||||
a relatively easy change. We started with manual package definitions and
|
|
||||||
eventually moved to automatic generation based on production data.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
== Caches and Serving Content ==
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In the simplest implementation of static resources, you write out a raw JS tag
|
|
||||||
with something like ##src="/js/base.js"##. This will break disastrously as you
|
|
||||||
scale, because clients will be running with stale versions of resources. There
|
|
||||||
are bunch of subtle problems (especially once you have a CDN), but the big one
|
|
||||||
is that if a user is browsing your site as you push/deploy, their client will
|
|
||||||
not make requests for the resources they already have in cache, so even if your
|
|
||||||
servers respond correctly to If-None-Match (ETags) and If-Modified-Since
|
|
||||||
(Expires) the site will appear completely broken to everyone who was using it
|
|
||||||
when you push a breaking change to static resources.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The best way to solve this problem is to version your resources in the URI,
|
|
||||||
so each version of a resource has a unique URI:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
rsrc/af04d14/js/base.js
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
When you push, users will receive pages which reference the new URI so their
|
|
||||||
browsers will retrieve it.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
**But**, there's a big problem, once you have a bunch of web frontends:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
While you're pushing, a user may make a request which is handled by a server
|
|
||||||
running the new version of the code, which delivers a page with a new resource
|
|
||||||
URI. Their browser then makes a request for the new resource, but that request
|
|
||||||
is routed to a server which has not been pushed yet, which delivers an old
|
|
||||||
version of the resource. They now have a poisoned cache: old resource data for
|
|
||||||
a new resource URI.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
You can do a lot of clever things to solve this, but the solution we chose at
|
|
||||||
Facebook was to serve resources out of a database instead of off disk. Before a
|
|
||||||
push begins, new resources are written to the database so that every server is
|
|
||||||
able to satisfy both old and new resource requests.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This also made it relatively easy to do processing steps (like stripping
|
|
||||||
comments and whitespace) in one place, and just insert a minified/processed
|
|
||||||
version of CSS and JS into the database.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
== Reference Implementation: Celerity ==
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some of the ideas discussed here are implemented in Phabricator's //Celerity//
|
|
||||||
system, which is essentially a simplified version of the //Haste// system used
|
|
||||||
by Facebook.
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -12,22 +12,19 @@ with teams. Phabricator is largely based on Facebook's internal tools.
|
||||||
The major components of Phabricator are:
|
The major components of Phabricator are:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- **Differential**, a code review tool; and
|
- **Differential**, a code review tool; and
|
||||||
- **Diffusion**, a repository browser.
|
- **Diffusion**, a repository browser; and
|
||||||
|
- **Maniphest**, a bug tracker.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Phabricator also includes a number of smaller tools.
|
Phabricator also includes a number of smaller tools.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Why use Phabricator? =
|
= Why use Phabricator? =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Phabricator gives you a box of reasonably decent tools for a comparatively small
|
Phabricator gives you a box of solid tools for a comparatively small setup cost.
|
||||||
setup cost. Plus:
|
The tools all work together and are richly integrated. The whole thing is free
|
||||||
|
and open source. You own all your data. Phabricator is extremely fast and proven
|
||||||
- It has some good project names.
|
to scale both to large datasets (Facebook has 500,000+ commits across many
|
||||||
- Facebook integration makes it very hip indeed.
|
repositories) and large organizations (Facebook has 500+ fulltime engineers).
|
||||||
- It's fairly snappy.
|
Phabricator's tools are easy to learn, understand, and use.
|
||||||
- You only have to install and configure one thing instead of setting up
|
|
||||||
and customizing a bunch of different things.
|
|
||||||
- A couple of the core tools are actually pretty good.
|
|
||||||
- Maniphest allows you to close tasks "out of spite".
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
However, Phabricator may also not be a good solution for you:
|
However, Phabricator may also not be a good solution for you:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -35,7 +32,8 @@ However, Phabricator may also not be a good solution for you:
|
||||||
with the toolsets you use lacking.
|
with the toolsets you use lacking.
|
||||||
- If you don't use SVN or Git, you'll have to add support for your VCS before
|
- If you don't use SVN or Git, you'll have to add support for your VCS before
|
||||||
you can get anywhere.
|
you can get anywhere.
|
||||||
- If you loathe PHP, well, it's written in PHP.
|
- If you loathe PHP, well, it's written in PHP. Sorry. It is a victim of
|
||||||
|
circumstances. We assert it is well-written PHP, at least.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
= Next Steps =
|
= Next Steps =
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue