Summary:
Ref T10537. For Nuance, I want to introduce new sources (like "GitHub" or "GitHub via Nuance" or something) but this needs to modularize eventually.
Split ContentSource apart so applications can add new content sources.
Test Plan:
This change has huge surface area, so I'll hold it until post-release. I think it's fairly safe (and if it does break anything, the breaks should be fatals, not anything subtle or difficult to fix), there's just no reason not to hold it for a few hours.
- Viewed new module page.
- Grepped for all removed functions/constants.
- Viewed some transactions.
- Hovered over timestamps to get content source details.
- Added a comment via Conduit.
- Added a comment via web.
- Ran `bin/storage upgrade --namespace XXXXX --no-quickstart -f` to re-run all historic migrations.
- Generated some objects with `bin/lipsum`.
- Ran a bulk job on some tasks.
- Ran unit tests.
{F1190182}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10537
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15521
Summary:
Ref T10349. These got sort of half-weirded-up before I separated subscriptions and watching fully. New rules are:
- You can watch whatever you want.
- Watching a parent watches everything inside it.
- If you're watching "Stonework" and go to "Stonework > Masonry", you'll see a "Watching Ancestor" hint to let you know you're already watching a parent or ancestor.
Test Plan:
- Watched and unwatched "Stonework".
- Watched and unwatched "Stonework > Iteration IV".
- While watching "Stonework", visited "Iteration IV" and saw "Watching Ancestor" hint.
- Created a task tagged "Stonework > Iteration IV". Got notified about it because I watch "Stonework".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10349
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15280
Summary:
Ref T10010. When you try to add "Sprint 35" to a task, remove "Sprint 34", etc. Briefly:
- A task can't be in Sprint 3 and Sprint 4.
- A task can't be in "A" and "A > B" (but "A > B" and "A > C" are fine).
- When a user makes an edit which would violate one of these rules, preserve the last tag in each group of conflicts.
Test Plan:
- Added fairly comprehensive tests.
- Added a bunch of different tags to things, saw them properly exclude conflicting tags.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10010
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15167
Summary:
Ref T9979. There are currently some hacks around Conpherence indexing: it does not really use the fulltext index, but its own specialized index. However, it's kind of hacked up so it can get reindexed by the normal indexing pipeline.
Lift it up into IndexEngine, instead of FulltextEngine. Specifically, the new stuff is going to look like this:
- IndexEngine: Rebuild all indexes.
- ConpherenceIndexExtension: Rebuild thread indexes.
- ProjectMemberIndexExtension: Rebuild project membership views.
- NgramIndexExtension: Rebuild ngram indexes.
- FulltextIndexExtension / FulltextEngine: Rebuild fulltext indexes, a special type of index.
- FulltextCommentExtension: Rebuild comment fulltext indexes.
- FulltextProjectExtension: Rebuild project fulltext indexes.
- etc.
Most of this is at least sort-of-in-place as of this diff, although some of the part in the middle is still pretty rough.
Test Plan:
- Made a unique comment in a Conpherence thread.
- Used `bin/search index --force` to rebuild the index.
- Searched for the comment.
- Found the thread.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14841
Summary:
Ref T9890. Ref T9979. Several adjacent goals:
- The `SearchEngine` vs `ApplicationSearchEngine` thing is really confusing. There are also a bunch of confusing class names and class relationships within the fulltext indexing. I want to rename these classes to be more standard (`IndexEngine`, `IndexEngineExtension`, etc). Rename `SearchIndexer` to `IndexEngine`. A future change will rename `SearchEngine`.
- Add the index locks described in T9890.
- Structure things a little more normally so future diffs can do the "EngineExtension" thing more cleanly.
Test Plan:
Indexing:
- Renamed a task to have a unique word in the title.
- Ran `bin/search index Txxx`.
- Searched for unique word.
- Found task.
Locking:
- Added a `sleep(10)` after the `lock()` call.
- Ran `bin/search index Txxx` in two windows.
- Saw first one lock, sleep 10 seconds, index.
- Saw second one give up temporarily after failing to grab the lock.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9890, T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14834
Summary: Ref T10004. This lost a couple of fields when I rearranged how descriptions work. Restore them.
Test Plan:
- Viewed "Using HTTP Parameters".
- Everything had nice descriptions.
- No more weird phantom/misleading 'comment' transaction in UI.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14822
Summary:
Ref T10004. This restores "alice created this task." transactions, but in a generic way so we don't have to special case one of the other edits with an old `null` value.
In most cases, creating an object now shows only an "alice created this thing." transaction, unless nonempty defaults (usually, policy or spaces) were adjusted.
Test Plan: Created pastes, tasks, blogs, packages, and forms. Saw a single "alice created this thing." transaction.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14820
Summary:
Ref T10004. Fixes T9527. Currently, we render two kinds of bad policy/space transactions during object creation.
First, we render a transaction showing a change from the default policy/space to the selected policy/space:
> alice shifted this object from space S1 Default to space S2 Secret.
This is a //good transaction// (it's showing that the default was changed, which could be important for policy stuff!) but it's confusing because it makes it sound like the object briefly existed in space S1, when it did not.
Instead, render this:
> alice created this object in space S2 Secret.
This retains the value (show that the object was created in an unusual space) without the confusion.
Second, when you create a "New Bug Report", we render a transaction like this:
> alice changed the visibility of this task from "All Users" to "Community".
This is distracting and not useful, becasue it's a locked default of the form. This was essentially fixed by D14810. The new behavior is to show this, //only// if the value was changed from the form value:
> alice created this object with visibility "Administrators".
This should reduce confusion, reduce fluff in the default cases, and do a better job of calling out important changes (basically, unusual spaces/policies).
Test Plan:
- Created an edit form with a default space and policies.
- Used that form to create task with:
- same values as form;
- different values from form.
When I changed the form value, I got transactions. When I left it the same, I didn't.
The transactions rendered in the non-confusing "created with ..." variant.
Editing the values created normal transactions with "changed policy from X to Y".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9527, T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14811
Summary:
Fixes T7661. Ref T9527.
When you create a task, especially with an EditEngine form, you currently get more noise than is useful. For example:
> alice created this task.
> alice changed the edit policy from "All Users" to "Community (Project)".
> alice added projects: Feature Request, Differential.
> alice added a subscriber: alice.
Transaction (1) is a little useful, since it saves us from a weird empty state and shows the object creation time.
Transaction (2) is totally useless (and even misleading) because that's the default policy for the form.
Transaction (3) isn't //completely// useless but isn't very interesting, and probably not worth the real-estate.
Transaction (4) is totally useless.
(These transactions are uniquely useless when creating objects -- when editing them later, they're fine.)
This adds two new rules to hide transactions:
- Hide transactions from object creation if the old value is empty (e.g., set title, set projects, set subscribers).
- Hide transactions from object creation if the old value is the same as the form default value (e.g., set policy to default, set priorities to default, set status to default).
NOTE: These rules also hide the "created this object" transaction, since it's really one of those transaction types in all cases. I want to keep that around in the long term, but just have it be a separate `TYPE_CREATE` action -- currently, it is this weird, inconsistent action where we pick some required field (like title) and special-case the rendering if the old value is `null`. So fixing that is a bit more involved. For now, I'm just dropping these transactions completely, but intend to restore them later.
Test Plan:
- Created objects.
- Usually saw no extra create transactions.
- Saw extra create transactions when making an important change away from form defaults (e.g., overriding form policy).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T7661, T9527
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14810
Summary:
Ref T10004. Tweaks some of the UX a little to be more intuitive/inviting?
- Button says "Configure Form" instead of "Actions".
- Root list is less "developer-ey" and more "explain what this is for-ey".
Test Plan:
{F1028928}
{F1028929}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14808
Summary:
Ref T9908. These meta-edit-engines are used to generate the main editengine UIs, but they're also editable.
Fix an exception when trying to edit the meta editengine.
Test Plan: Edited editengineconfiguration editengine.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14783
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. Puts reordering UI in place:
- For create forms, this just lets you pick a UI display order other than alphabetical. Seems nice to have.
- For edit forms, this lets you create a hierarchy of advanced-to-basic forms and give them different visibility policies, if you want.
Test Plan:
{F1017842}
- Verified that "Edit Thing" now takes me to the highest-ranked edit form.
- Verified that create menu and quick create menu reflect application order.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14704
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. This attempts to move us forward on answering this question:
> Which form gets used when a user clicks "Edit Task"?
One answer is "the same form that was used to create the task". There are several problems with that:
- The form might not exist anymore.
- The user might not have permission to see it.
- Some of the fields might be hidden, essentially preventing them from being edited.
- We have to store the value somewhere and old tasks won't have a value.
- Any instructions on the form probably don't apply to edits.
One answer is "force the default, full form". That's not as problematic, but it means we have no ability to create limited access users who see fewer fields.
The answer in this diff is:
- Forms can be marked as "edit forms".
- We take the user to the first edit form they have permission to see, from a master list.
This allows you to create several forms like:
- Advanced Edit Form (say, all fields -- visible to administrators).
- Basic Edit Form (say, no policies -- visible to trusted users).
- Noob Edit Form (say, no policies, priorities, or status -- visible to everyone).
Then you can give everyone access to "noob", some people access to "basic", and a few people access to "advanced".
This might only be part of the answer. In particular, you can still //use// any edit form you can see, so we could do these things in the future:
- Give you an option to switch to a different form if you want.
- Save the form the task was created with, and use that form by default.
If we do pursue those, we can fall back to this behavior if there's a problem with them (e.g., original form doesn't exist or wasn't recorded).
There's also no "reorder" UI yet, that'll be coming in the next diff.
I'm also going to try to probably make the "create" and "edit" stuff a little more consistent / less weird in a bit.
Test Plan: Marked various forms as edit forms or not edit forms, made edits, hit permissions errors, etc.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14702
Summary:
Ref T9908. Simplify some of the policies here:
- If you can edit an application (currently, always "Administrators"), you can view and edit all of its forms.
- You must be able to edit an application to create new forms.
- Improve some error messages.
- Get about halfway through letting users reorder forms in the "Create" menu if they want to sort by something weird since it'll need schema changes and I can do them all in one go here.
Test Plan:
- Tried to create and edit forms as an unprivileged user.
- Created and edited forms as an administrator.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14700
Summary:
Ref T9132. Open to discussion here since it's mostly product stuff, but here's my gut on this:
- Change Maniphest behavior to stop assigning tasks if they're unassigned when closed. I think this behavior often doesn't make much sense. We'll probably separately track "who closed this" in T4434 eventually.
- Only add the actor as a subscriber if they comment, like in other applications. Previously, we added them as a subscriber for other types of changes (like priority and status changes). This is more consistent, but open to retaining the old behavior or some compromise between the two.
- Retain the "when changing owner, subscribe the old owner" behavior.
Test Plan:
- Added a comment, got CC'd.
- Changed owners, saw old owner get CC'd.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14670
Summary: Ref T9132. This still has a lot of rough edges but the basics seem to work OK.
Test Plan: {F1012627}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14653
Summary:
Ref T9132.
Let configurations be enabled/disabled. This doesn't do much right now.
Let configurations be marked as default entries in the application "Create" menu. This makes them show up in the application in a dropdown, so you can replace the default form and/or provide several forms.
In Maniphest, we'll do this to provide a menu something like this:
- New Bug Report
- New Feature Request
- ADVANCED TASK CREATION!!11~ (only available for Community members)
Test Plan: {F1005679}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14584
Summary: Ref T9851. See T9860. This adds a missing capability to custom HeraldActions, to pave the way for removing the obsolete/undesirable WILLEDITTASK and DIDEDITTASK events.
Test Plan: See T9860 for a replacement action.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9851
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14575
Summary:
Fixes T9850. The `getComment()` test should be a `hasComment()` test, in order to discard empty comments.
Also backport a couple of future fixes which can get you into trouble if you reconfigure forms in awkward ways.
Test Plan: Created a new paste without a comment.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9850
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14571
Summary:
Ref T9132. Allows fields to be locked (shown, but not modifiable) and hidden (not shown).
In both cases, default values are still respected.
This lets you do things like create a form that generates objects with specific projects, policies, etc.
Test Plan:
- Set defaults.
- Locked and hid a bunch of fields.
- Created new objects using the resulting form.
{F975801}
{F975802}
{F975803}
{F975804}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14509
Summary: Ref T9132. Allow form configurations to include defaults (like default projects, spaces, policies, etc).
Test Plan:
Defaulted "Language" to "Rainbow", plus other adjustments:
{F975746}
{F975747}
{F975748}
{F975749}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14508
Summary:
Ref T9132. This just makes edited forms do //something//, albeit not anything very useful yet.
You can now edit a form and:
- Retitle it;
- add a preamble (instructions on top of the form); and
- reorder the form's fields.
Test Plan:
{F974632}
{F974633}
{F974634}
{F974635}
{F974636}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: hach-que
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14503
Summary:
Fixes T9787. Currently, file PHID extraction logic happens very early, before we normalize/merge/etc the transactions.
In D14390, I changed how the CONTENT transaction works: before, callers would pass in a file PHID. Afterward, they just pass in the content.
Passing in the content is generaly easier and feels more correct, but inadvertenly broke PHID extraction because converting the content into a file PHID now happened after we extracted the PHID. So we'd extract the entire text of the paste as a "file PHID", which wouldn't work.
Instead, extract file PHIDs later. This impacts a couple of other applications (Conpherence, Pholio) which receive an object or have an unusual file-oriented transaction.
Test Plan:
- Made a new paste, verified the raw file attached to it properly.
- Made and updated a mock, verified all the files attached properly.
- Updated a Conpherence room image, verified the files attached properly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14494
Summary:
Fixes T9799. Currently, if you can't see an application like Paste, we fatal when trying to generate a result for `conduit.query`, because the new EditEngine-based `paste.edit` method doesn't "know" that it's a "Paste" method.
Straighten this out, and use policies and queries a little more correctly/consistently.
Test Plan:
- Called `conduit.query` as a user who does not have permission to use Paste.
- Before change: fatal.
- After change: results, excluding "paste.*" methods.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: cburroughs
Maniphest Tasks: T9799
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14492
Summary:
Ref T9132. This diff doesn't do anything interesting, it just lays the groundwork for more interesting future diffs.
Broadly, the idea here is to let you create multiple views of each edit form. For example, we might create several different "Create Task" forms, like:
- "New Bug Report"
- "New Feature Request"
These would be views of the "Create Task" form, but with various adjustments:
- A form might have additional instructions ("how to file a good bug report").
- A form might have prefilled values for some fields (like particular projects, subscribers, or policies).
- A form might have some fields locked (so they can not be edited) or hidden.
- A form might have a different field order.
- A form might have a limited visibility policy, so only some users can access it.
This diff adds a new storage object (`EditEngineConfiguration`) to keep track of all those customizations and represent "a form which has been configured to look and work a certain way".
This doesn't let these configurations do anything useful/interesting, and you can't access them directly yet, it's just all the boring plumbing to enable more interesting behavior in the future.
Test Plan:
ApplicationEditor forms now let you manage available forms and edit the current form:
{F959025}
There's a new (bare bones) list of all available engines:
{F959030}
And if you jump into an engine, you can see all the forms for it:
{F959038}
The actual form configurations have standard detail/edit pages. The edit pages are themselves driven by ApplicationEditor, of course, so you can edit the form for editing forms.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14453
Summary: Ref T8992, Validate alias text field length.
Test Plan: Create Phurl with alias of more than 64 characters. Get error. Reduce length of alias to successfully save Phurl.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T8992
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14403
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T4768. This is a rough v0 of ApplicationEditor, which replaces the edit workflow in Paste.
This mostly looks and works like ApplicationSearch, and is heavily modeled on it.
Roughly, we define a set of editable fields and the ApplicationEditor stuff builds everything else.
This has no functional changes, except:
- I removed "Fork Paste" since I don't think it's particularly useful now that pastes are editable. We could restore it if users miss it.
- Subscribers are now editable.
- Form field order is a little goofy (this will be fixed in a future diff).
- Subscribers and projects are now race-resistant.
The race-resistance works like this: instead of submitting just the new value ("subscribers=apple, dog") and doing a set operation ("set subscribers = apple, dog"), we submit the old and new values ("original=apple" + "new=apple, dog") then apply the user's changes as an add + remove ("add=dog", "remove=<none>"). This means that two users who do "Edit Paste" at around the same time and each add or remove a couple of subscribers won't overwrite each other, unless they actually add or remove the exact same subscribers (in which case their edits legitimately conflict). Previously, the last user to save would win, and whatever was in their field would overwrite the prior state, potentially losing the first user's edits.
Test Plan:
- Created pastes.
- Created pastes via API.
- Edited pastes.
- Edited every field.
- Opened a paste in two windows and did project/subscriber edits in each, saved in arbitrary order, had edits respected.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T4768, T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14390
Summary: Ref T9352. See D13635. Build targets can have variables already, but let builds have them too. This mostly enables future use cases (sub-builds, more sophisticated build triggers).
Test Plan: With a custom Herald rule + action like the one in T9352, updated a revision and saw it generate multiple builds with varying parameters.
Reviewers: chad, hach-que
Reviewed By: hach-que
Maniphest Tasks: T9352
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14222
Summary:
Ref T8672. Ref T9187. Root issue in at least one case is:
- User makes a commit including a file with some non-UTF8 text (say, a Japanese file full of Shift-JIS).
- We pass the file to the TransactionEditor so it can inline or attach the patch if the server is configured for these things.
- When inlining patches, we convert them to UTF8 before inlining. We must do this since the rest of the mail is UTF8.
- When attaching patches, we send them in the original encoding (as file attachments). This is correct, and means we need to give the worker the raw patch in whatever encoding it was originally in: we can't just convert it to utf8 earlier, or we'd attach the wrong patch in some cases.
- TransactionEditor does its thing (e.g., creates the commit), then gets ready to send mail about whatever it did.
- The publishing work now happens in the daemon queue, so we prepare to queue a PublishWorker and pass it the patch (with some other data).
- When we queue workers, we serialize the state data with JSON.
So far, so good. But this is where things go wrong:
- JSON can't encode binary data, and can't encode Shift-JIS. The encoding silently fails and we ignore it.
Then we get to the worker, and things go wrong-er:
- Since the data is bad, we fatal. This isn't a permanent failure, so we continue retrying the task indefinitely.
This applies several fixes:
# When queueing tasks, fail loudly when JSON encoding fails.
# In the worker, fail permanently when data can't be decoded.
# Allow Editors to specify that some of their data is binary and needs special handling.
This is fairly messy, but some simpler alternatives don't seem like good ways forward:
- We can't convert to UTF8 earlier, because we need the original raw patch when adding it as an attachment.
- We could encode //only// this field, but I suspect some other fields will also need attention, so that adding a mechanism will be worthwhile. In particular, I suspect filenames //may// be causing a similar problem in some cases.
- We could convert task data to always use a serialize()-based binary safe encoding, but this is a larger change and I think it's correct that things are UTF8 by default, even if it makes a bit of a mess. I'd rather have an explicit mess like this than a lot of binary data floating around.
The change to make `LiskDAO` will almost certainly catch some other problems too, so I'm going to hold this until after `stable` is cut. These problems were existing problems (i.e., the code was previously breaking or destroying data) so it's definitely correct to catch them, but this will make the problems much more obvious/urgent than they previously were.
Test Plan:
- Created a commit with a bunch of Shift-JIS stuff in a file.
- Tried to import it.
Prior to patch:
- Broken PublishWorker with distant, irrelevant error message.
With patch partially applied (only new error checking):
- Explicit, local error message about bad key in serialized data.
With patch fully applied:
- Import went fine and mail generated.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: devurandom, nevogd
Maniphest Tasks: T8672, T9187
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13939
Summary: Ref T5791. This is still very basic (no global actions, no support for matching headers/bodies/recipients/etc) but gets the core in.
Test Plan:
{F715209}
{F715211}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5791
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13897
Summary:
Ref T5791. This diff adds a "sensitive" flag to `PhabricatorMetaMTAMail`, defaults it to true in the constructor, and then sets it to false in teh application transaction editor. Assumption here is that sensitive emails are basically all the emails that don't flow through the application transaction editor.
This diff also gets a basic "mail view" page up and going.
This diff also fixes a bug writing recipient edges; the actor was being included.
This bug also fixes a querying bug; we shouldn't do the automagic join of $viewer is recipient or $viewer is actor if folks are querying for recipients or actors already. The bug manifested itself as having the "inbox" be inbox + outbox.
Test Plan: viewd list of messages. viewed message detail.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T5791
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13406
Summary:
Ref T8574. Currently, failures during mail body construction, feed publishing, or search indexing could cause us to retry the publishing task and potentially send duplicate mail.
Instead, build (but do not send) the mail first, then send all the mail at the very end.
This isn't completley perfect, but should make it enormously harder for duplicate mail to be generated.
Test Plan: Sent some mail, ran the daemons, saw it show up normally in the outbound queue.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8574
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13320
Summary:
Ref T5681. Getting this to work correctly is a bit tricky, mostly because of the policy checks we do prior to applying an edit.
I think I came up with a mostly-reasonable approach, although it's a little bit gross. It uses `spl_object_hash()` so it shouldn't be able to do anything bad/dangerous (the hints are strictly bound to the hinted object, which is a clone that we destroy moments later).
Test Plan:
- Added + ran a unit test.
- Created a task with a "Subscribers" policy with me as a subscriber (without the hint stuff, this isn't possible: since you aren't a subscriber *yet*, you get a "you won't be able to see it" error).
- Unsubscribed from a task with a "Subscribers" policy, was immediately unable to see it.
- Created a task with a "subscribers" policy and a project subscriber with/without me as a member (error / success, respectively).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5681
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13259
Summary:
Ref T8498. I want to add Spaces to these, and the logic for getting Spaces right is a bit tricky, so swap these to ApplicationTransactions.
One new piece of tech: made it easier for Editors to raise DuplicateKeyException as a normal ValidationException, so callers don't have to handle this case specially.
One behavioral change: we no longer require these addresses to be at the `auth.email-domains` domains -- I think this wasn't quite right in the general case. It's OK to require users to have `@mycompany.com` addresses but add `@phabricator.mycompany-infrastructure.com` addresses here if you want.
Test Plan:
- Tried to create a duplicate email.
- Tried to create an empty email.
- Tried to create an invalid email.
- Created a new email.
- Deleted an email.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8498
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13246
Summary:
Ref T8377. This adds a standard disable/enable feature to Spaces, with a couple of twists:
- You can't create new stuff in an archived space, and you can't move stuff into an archived space.
- We don't show results from an archived space by default in ApplicationSearch queries. You can still find these objects if you explicitly search for "Spaces: <the archived space>".
So this is a "put it in a box in the attic" sort of operation, but that seems fairly nice/reasonable.
Test Plan:
- Archived and activated spaces.
- Used ApplicationSearch, which omitted archived objects by default but allowed searches for them, specifically, to succeed.
- Tried to create objects into an archived space (this is not allowed).
- Edited objects in an archived space (this is OK).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8377
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13238
Summary: Fixes T8464. We could lose the additional users from "Send an email..." rules //if// Herald did not apply any other transactions to the task.
Test Plan:
- Destroyed all Herald rules.
- Created a single "Send an email to..." rule.
- Created a task.
- Saw target get an email.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8464
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13245
Summary:
Ref T8449. Try out some more subtle behaviors:
- Make the "Space" control part of the policy control, so the UI shows "Visible To: [Space][Policy]". I think this helps make the role of spaces more clear. It also makes them easier to implement.
- Don't show the default space in headers: instead, show nothing.
- If the user has access to only one space, pretend spaces don't exist (no edit controls, no header stuff).
This might be confusing, but I think most of the time it will all align fairly well with user expectation.
Test Plan:
- Viewed a list of pastes (saw Space with non-default space, no space with default space, no space with user in only one space).
- Viewed a paste (saw Space with non-default space, saw no space with default space, saw no space with user in only one space).
- Edited spaces on objects (control as privileged user, no control as locked user).
- Created a new paste in a space (got space select as privileged user, no select as locked user).
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8449
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13229
Summary:
Fixes T8483. I did this incorrectly in D13159, by doing it correctly first and then editing it carelessly. For most transaction types, it didn't matter, but did for inline state.
Also, clean up any bad inline state transactions.
Test Plan:
- Ran migration, bad transactions vanished.
- Marked some inline comments as done.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8483
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13226
Summary: Now that Users implement PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface, we try to write an inverse edge. At least for now, we should retain the old behavior instead.
Test Plan:
- Unit tests which cover this stuff pass again.
- Grepped for other `instanceof PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface`, the all seemed either benign or irrelevant.
Reviewers: joshuaspence, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13215
Summary:
Fixes T8464. We could incorrectly use a cached value when computing CC's.
Just load a fresh value. There are no other callers that would benefit from this cache, so it's more complicated to reload it correctly prior to publishing than to just skip it.
Also make the PHID headers unique.
Test Plan:
- Verified that users received mail about the transactions which caused them to be added to an object.
- Veirfied that headers no longer have redundant values.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8464
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13206
Summary:
Ref T8424. This adds crude integration with Paste's edit/view workflows: you can change the space a Paste appears in, see transactions, and get a policy callout.
Lots of rough edges and non-obviousness but it pretty much works.
Test Plan:
- Created and updated Pastes.
- Moved them between spaces, saw policy effects.
- Read transactions.
- Looked at feed.
- Faked query to return no spaces, saw control and other stuff vanish.
- Faked query to return no spaces, created pastes.
- Tried to submit bad values and got errors.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8424
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13159
Summary: Ref T6367.
Test Plan:
- Added and executed unit tests.
- Sent mail to A (en_US) and B (en_A*).
- Got one mail in English and one mail in ENGLISH.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6367
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13142
Summary:
Ref T6367. Removes `multiplexMail()`!
We can't pass a single body into a function which splits it anymore: we need to split recipients first, then build bodies for each recipient list. This lets us build separate bodies for each recipient's individual translation/access levels.
The new logic does this:
- First, split recipients into groups called "targets".
- Each target corresponds to one actual mail we're going to build.
- Each target has a viewer (whose translation / access levels will be used to generate the mail).
- Each target has a to/cc list (the users who we'll ultimately send the mail to).
- For each target, build a custom mail body based on the viewer's access levels and settings (language prefs not actually implemented).
- Then, deliver the mail.
Test Plan:
- Read new config help.
Then did a bunch of testing, primarily with `bin/mail list-outbound` and `bin/mail show-outbound` (to review generated mail), `bin/phd debug taskmaster` (to run daemons freely) and `bin/worker execute --id <id>` (to repeatedly test a specific piece of code after identifying an issue).
With `one-mail-per-recipient` on (default):
- Sent mail to multiple users.
- Verified mail showed up in `mail list-outbound`.
- Examined mail with `mail show-outbound`.
- Added a project that a subscriber could not see.
- Verified it was not present in `X-Phabricator-Projects`.
- Verified it was rendered as "Restricted Project" for the non-permissioned viewer.
- Added a subscriber, then changed the object policy so they could not see it and sent mail.
- Verified I received mail but the other user did not.
- Enabled public replies and verified mail generated with public addresses.
- Disabld public replies and verified mail generated with private addresses.
With `one-mail-per-recipient` off:
- Verified that one mail is sent to all recipients.
- Verified users who can not see the object are still filtered.
- Verified that partially-visible projects are completely visible in the mail (this violates policies, as documented, as the best available compromise).
- Enabled public replies and verified the mail generated with "Reply To".
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: carlsverre, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6367
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13131
Summary:
Ref T6367. Do all mail, feed, notification and search stuff from the daemons, in all editors.
There are four relatively-stateful editors (Audit, Differential, Phriction, PhortuneCart) which needed special care to move state into the daemons properly.
Beyond that, I moved mailTo/mailCC/feedRelated/feedNotify to be computed before we enter the worker:
- This is simpler, since a lot of editors rely on being able to call `$object->getReviewers()` or similar to compute them.
- This is more correct, since we want to freeze the lists at this moment in time.
Finally, I renamed `loadEdges` to `willPublish` and made it a slightly more general hook.
---
This is a bit fragile and I'm not //thrilled// about it.
It would probably be cleaner to have separate Editor and Publisher classes (something like @fabe's D11329 did). However, I think that's quite a lot of work, and I'd like to see stronger motivation for it (either in this actually being more fragile than I think, or there being other things we get out of it). Overall, I'm comfortable with this change, just definitely not a big fan of the "save" + "load" pattern since I think it's really fragile, nonobvious, hard to debug/predict, etc.
Test Plan:
Directly updated editors:
- Created a new Phriction page, saw "Document Content".
- Edited a Phriction page, saw "Document Diff".
- Edited a revision, got normal looking mail.
- Faked in `changedPriorToCommitURI` and verified it survived the state boundary.
- Sent Audit mail.
- Sent invoice mail.
Indirect editors - for these, I just made a change and made sure the mail generated:
- Updated a paste.
- Updated an event.
- Updated a thread.
- Updated a task.
- Updated a mock.
- Updated a question.
- Updated a project.
- Updated a file.
- Updated an initiative.
- Updated a Legalpad document.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley, fabe
Maniphest Tasks: T6367
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13115
