Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
<?php
|
|
|
|
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
final class FundBacker extends FundDAO
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
implements
|
|
|
|
PhabricatorPolicyInterface,
|
|
|
|
PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface {
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
protected $initiativePHID;
|
|
|
|
protected $backerPHID;
|
|
|
|
protected $amountInCents;
|
|
|
|
protected $status;
|
|
|
|
protected $properties = array();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
private $initiative = self::ATTACHABLE;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
const STATUS_NEW = 'new';
|
|
|
|
const STATUS_IN_CART = 'in-cart';
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public static function initializeNewBacker(PhabricatorUser $actor) {
|
|
|
|
return id(new FundBacker())
|
|
|
|
->setBackerPHID($actor->getPHID())
|
|
|
|
->setStatus(self::STATUS_NEW);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
public function getConfiguration() {
|
|
|
|
return array(
|
|
|
|
self::CONFIG_AUX_PHID => true,
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
self::CONFIG_SERIALIZATION => array(
|
|
|
|
'properties' => self::SERIALIZATION_JSON,
|
|
|
|
),
|
2014-09-19 14:44:40 +02:00
|
|
|
self::CONFIG_COLUMN_SCHEMA => array(
|
|
|
|
'status' => 'text32',
|
|
|
|
'amountInCents' => 'uint32',
|
|
|
|
),
|
2014-10-01 16:53:50 +02:00
|
|
|
self::CONFIG_KEY_SCHEMA => array(
|
|
|
|
'key_initiative' => array(
|
|
|
|
'columns' => array('initiativePHID'),
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
'key_backer' => array(
|
|
|
|
'columns' => array('backerPHID'),
|
|
|
|
),
|
|
|
|
),
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
) + parent::getConfiguration();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function generatePHID() {
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return PhabricatorPHID::generateNewPHID(FundBackerPHIDType::TYPECONST);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
protected function didReadData() {
|
|
|
|
// The payment processing code is strict about types.
|
|
|
|
$this->amountInCents = (int)$this->amountInCents;
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getProperty($key, $default = null) {
|
|
|
|
return idx($this->properties, $key, $default);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function setProperty($key, $value) {
|
|
|
|
$this->properties[$key] = $value;
|
|
|
|
return $this;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
public function getInitiative() {
|
|
|
|
return $this->assertAttached($this->initiative);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function attachInitiative(FundInitiative $initiative = null) {
|
|
|
|
$this->initiative = $initiative;
|
|
|
|
return $this;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* -( PhabricatorPolicyInterface )----------------------------------------- */
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getCapabilities() {
|
|
|
|
return array(
|
|
|
|
PhabricatorPolicyCapability::CAN_VIEW,
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getPolicy($capability) {
|
|
|
|
switch ($capability) {
|
|
|
|
case PhabricatorPolicyCapability::CAN_VIEW:
|
|
|
|
// If we have the initiative, use the initiative's policy.
|
|
|
|
// Otherwise, return NOONE. This allows the backer to continue seeing
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
// a backer even if they're no longer allowed to see the initiative.
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$initiative = $this->getInitiative();
|
|
|
|
if ($initiative) {
|
|
|
|
return $initiative->getPolicy($capability);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return PhabricatorPolicies::POLICY_NOONE;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function hasAutomaticCapability($capability, PhabricatorUser $viewer) {
|
|
|
|
return ($viewer->getPHID() == $this->getBackerPHID());
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function describeAutomaticCapability($capability) {
|
|
|
|
return pht('A backer can always see what they have backed.');
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* -( PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface )------------------------- */
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getApplicationTransactionEditor() {
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return new FundBackerEditor();
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getApplicationTransactionObject() {
|
|
|
|
return $this;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
public function getApplicationTransactionTemplate() {
|
2014-09-12 15:31:11 +02:00
|
|
|
return new FundBackerTransaction();
|
Scaffolding for Fund
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
2014-09-11 22:38:58 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|