Summary:
Ref T5873. This provides paths and line numbers for inline comments.
This is a touch hacky but I was able to keep it mostly under control.
Test Plan:
- Made inline comments.
- Called API, got path/line information.
{F5120157}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5873
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18469
Summary: Minor cleanup, this logic can be simpler. Instead of special-casing inlines as having an effect if the have a comment, just consider any transaction with a comment to have an effect. I'm fairly certain this is always true.
Test Plan: Made inlines, tried to submit empty comments. Behavior unchanged.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18468
Summary:
Ref T5873. See PHI14. I don't want to just expose internal transaction data to Conduit by default, since it's often: unstable, unusable, sensitive, or some combination of the three.
Instead, let ModularTransactions opt in to providing additional data to Conduit, similar to other infrastructure. If a transaction doesn't, the API returns an empty skeleton for it. This is generally fine since most transactions have no real use cases, and I think we can fill them in as we go.
This also probably builds toward T5726, which would likely use the same format, and perhaps simply not publish stuff which did not opt in.
This doesn't actually cover "comment" or "inline comment", which are presumably what PHI14 is after, since neither is modular. I'll probably just put a hack in place for this until they can modularize since I suspect modularizing them here is difficult.
Test Plan: Ran `transaction.search` on a revision, saw some transactions (title and status transactions) populate with values.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5873
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18467
Summary:
Ref T5873. See PHI14. This does the basics that are shared across everything (IDs, PHIDs, dates, comments).
It doesn't do types (I think I don't necessarily want to expose internal types over the API?) or transaction-specific data.
In the next change, I'm going to add ways to let ModularTransactions "opt-in" to providing more data to Conduit. I'll use this to flesh out the actual desired transaction types (comments, presumably inline comments) and likely leave the rest as skeletons for now until use cases arise so we don't create a backward compatibility issue (or a security issue!) by exposing tons of internal stuff as public-facing API.
Test Plan:
Ran queries, used paging. Retrieved an edited, deleted, and normal comment.
{F5120060}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5873
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18466
Summary: Simplifies the page, adds base support for PHUITwoColumn fixed from Instances (which I'll delete css there).
Test Plan:
click on every settings page, UI seems in tact, check mobile, desktop, mobile menus.
{F5102572}
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18436
Summary: Moves Settings to use a normal side navigation vs. a two column side navigation. It also updates Edit Engine to do the same, but I don't think there are other callsites. Added a consistent header for better clarification if you were editng your settings, global settings, or a bot's settings.
Test Plan: Test each page on a personal account, create global settings, test each page there, create a bot account, and test each page on the bot account. Anything else?
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18342
Summary: Cursory research indicates that "login" is a noun, referring to a form, and "log in" is a verb, referring to the action of logging in. I went though every instances of 'login' I could find and tried to clarify all this language. Also, we have "Phabricator" on the registration for like 4-5 times, which is a bit verbose, so I tried to simplify that language as well.
Test Plan: Tested logging in and logging out. Pages feel simpler.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18322
Summary:
Ref T12124. After D18134 we accept either "25" or "low" via HTTP parameters and when the field renders as a control, but if the form has a default value for the field but locks or hides it we don't actually run through that logic.
Canonicalize both when rendering the control and when using a raw saved default value.
Test Plan:
- Created a form with "Priority: Low".
- Hid the "Priority" field.
- Before patch: Tried to create a task, was rebuffed with a (now verbose and helpful, after D18135) error.
- Applied patch: things worked.
Reviewers: chad, amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T12124
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18142
Summary:
Ref T12124. This is a fairly narrow fix for existing saved EditEngine forms with a default priority value.
These saved forms have a numeric (or probably "string-numeric") default value, like "50". They lost their meaning after D18111, when "50" no longer appears in the dropdown. Instead, these forms all select the highest available priority.
At time of writing, this form was broken on this install, for example:
> https://secure.phabricator.com/transactions/editengine/maniphest.task/view/13/
Additionally, `/task/edit/form/123/?priority=...` (for templating forms) stopped working with `priority=50`. This isn't nearly as important, but a larger and more sudden compatiblity break than we need to make.
Add support for an "alias map" on `<select />` controls, so if the value comes in with something we don't recognize we'll treat it like some other value. Then alias all the numeric constants -- and other keywords -- to the right constants.
This ended up only affecting the `<select />` control in the web UI.
Test Plan:
- On `stable`, created a form with "Priority: Low".
- Before patch: form has "Priority: Unbreak Now!" on `master`.
- After patch: form has "Priority: Low" again.
- Used `?priority=25`, `?priority=wish`, `?priority=wishlist` to template forms: all forms worked.
Reviewers: amckinley, chad
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T12124
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18134
Summary:
Ref T12314. Open to counterdiffs / iterating / suggestions / skipping most or all of this, mostly just throwing this out there as a maybe-reasonable first pass.
When a task has a subtype (like "Plant" or "Animal"), provide some hints on the task list, workboards, and task detail.
To make these hints more useful, allow subtypes to have icons and colors.
Also use these icons and colors in the typeahead tokens.
The current rule is that we show the subtype if it's not the default subtype. Another rule we could use is "show the subtype if there's more than one subtype defined", but my guess is that most installs will mostly have something like "normal task" as the default subtype.
Test Plan:
The interfaces this affects are: task detail view, task list view, workboard cards, subtype typeahead.
{F3539128}
{F3539144}
{F3539167}
{F3539185}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: johnny-bit, bbrdaric, benwick, fooishbar
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17451
Summary: Ref T12732. Use `renderValue()` to build `renderValueList()` so we get nice fancy text for these.
Test Plan: {F4967410}
Reviewers: chad, amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T12732
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17966
Summary: Also changes access modifiers on `PhabricatorProjectTransactionEditor` and sets up `storage` for `applyExternalEffects`.
Test Plan: Created new projects, attempted to create without name, with too long of a name, and with a name that conflicts with other projects and observed expected errors.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T12673
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17947
Summary: Used by `PholioImageFileTransaction::mergeTransactions()`. I forgot to test adding multiple images to a Mock at the same time after migrating `mergeTransactions` over to the modular framework.
Test Plan: Added multiple images in a single transaction and didn't get an exception about accessing a protected function.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17946
Summary: Still needs some cleanup, but ready for review in broad outline form.
Test Plan:
Made lots of policy changes to the Badges application and confirmed expected rows in `application_xactions`, confirmed expected changes to `phabricator.application-settings`.
See example output (not quite working for custom policy objects) here:
{F4922240}
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, chad, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T11476
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17757
Summary: See D17812, etc. We can figure this out by looking at the object carefully. We don't need to go delete all the old TYPE_COMMENT (it doesn't hurt anything) but can nuke it when we see it.
Test Plan:
- Made a comment in Slowvote (supports commenting).
- Viewed an Almanac device (does not support commenting).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17822
Summary: Moves participants over to ModularTransactions, simplified a lot of the code. Fixes T12550
Test Plan:
Create a new room with just myself and myself + fake accounts.
Remove a person.
Remove myself.
Edit a room, topic.
Type some messages.
???
Profit
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T12550
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17685
Summary:
Fixes T12356.
- In this mail, we currently render "6:00 AM". Instead, render "6:00 AM (PDT)" or similar. This is consistent with times in other modern Transaction mail.
- Previously, we would render "UTC-7". Render "PDT" instead. For obscure zones with no known timezone abbreviation, fall back to "UTC-7".
Test Plan:
- Used `bin/calendar notify --minutes X` to trigger notifications, read email bodies.
- Used this script to list all `T` values and checked them for sanity:
```lang=php
<?php
$now = new DateTime();
$locales = DateTimeZone::listIdentifiers();
foreach ($locales as $locale) {
$zone = new DateTimeZone($locale);
$now->setTimeZone($zone);
printf(
"%s (%s)\n",
$locale,
$now->format('T'));
}
```
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12356
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17646
Summary:
Fixes T12502. This transaction probably should not be getting picked for feed rendering, but it currently does get selected in some cases.
This should probably be revisited eventually (e.g., when Maniphest moves to ModularTransactions) but just fix the brokenness for now.
Test Plan:
- Created a task in a space.
- Viewed feed.
- Saw the story render with readable text.
{F4555747}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12502
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17609
If we try to render an edge transaction which uses unknown edge constants,
it turns out we fatal. Degrade instead. This happened when viewing very old
badges.
Auditors: chad
Summary:
Fixes T12369. When you create objects they may technically be locked: either because the default state is legitimately locked, or because the default policies prevent you from viewing so we sort of technically end in a locked state.
Regardless, don't prompt during creation, since this prompt isn't useful even if the lock detection is completely legitimate.
Test Plan:
- In {nav Applications > Maniphest > Configure}, set "Default View Policy" to "No One".
- Tried to create a task.
- Before patch: prompted to override lock.
- After patch: no override prompt.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: d.maznekov
Maniphest Tasks: T12369
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17541
Summary:
Ref T12271. Currenty, when you "Accept" a revision, you always accept it for all reviewers you have authority over.
There are some situations where communication can be more clear if users can accept as only themselves, or for only some packages, etc. T12271 discusses some of these use cases in more depth.
Instead of making "Accept" a blanket action, default it to doing what it does now but let the user uncheck reviewers.
In cases where project/package reviewers aren't in use, this doesn't change anything.
For now, "reject" still acts the old way (reject everything). We could make that use checkboxes too, but I'm not sure there's as much of a use case for it, and I generally want users who are blocking stuff to have more direct accountability in a product sense.
Test Plan:
- Accepted normally.
- Accepted a subset.
- Tried to accept none.
- Tried to accept bogus reviewers.
- Accepted with myself not a reviewer
- Accepted with only one reviewer (just got normal "this will be accepted" text).
{F4251255}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12271
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17533
Summary: Fixes T12439. This pathway was just missing a `setContinueOnMissingFields(...)` to skip enforcement of required fields.
Test Plan:
- Added a required custom field.
- Mentioned any task without a field value in a comment.
- Edited that comment.
- Saved changes.
- Before fix: fatal in log.
- After fix: clean edit.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12439
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17536
Summary: Fixes T12434. I accidentally copy/pasted this too much in D17442.
Test Plan: Viewed a form edit page, no longer saw two copies of this action.
Reviewers: chad, cspeckmim
Reviewed By: chad, cspeckmim
Maniphest Tasks: T12434
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17530
Summary: Ref T12270. Builds out a BadgeCache for PhabricatorUser, primarily for Timeline, potentially feed? This should still work if we later let people pick which two, just switch query in BadgeCache.
Test Plan: Give out badges, test timeline for displaying badges from handles and without queries. Revoke a badge, see cache change.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T12270
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17503
Summary: Fixes T12398. This adds `withBadgeStatuses` as a query parameter when searching for Awards to show. In most (all?) cases we currently only show active badges.
Test Plan: Assign myself a badge, archive it and verify it does not appear on profile, comment form, or timeline.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T12398
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17499
Summary: Fixes T10698. This shows badges under the comment preview if the application uses TransactionCommentView. I suspect not everything does, but will pick the fix up for free when modernized.
Test Plan: Test commenting on a task with and without a user that has a badge. See badge preview.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T10698
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17480
Summary:
Ref T12337. Ref T5873. This provides a generic "edge.search" method which feels like other "verison 3" `*.search` methods.
The major issues here are:
1. Edges use constants internally, which aren't great for an API.
2. A lot of edges are internal and probably not useful to query.
3. Edges don't have a real "id", so paginating them properly is challenging.
I've solved these things like this:
- Edges must opt-in to being available via Conduit by providing a human-readable key (like "mention" instead of "52"). This solvs (1) and (2).
- I faked a mostly-reasonable behavior for paginating.
Test Plan:
Ran various valid and invalid searches. Paginated a large search. Reviewed UI.
{F3651818}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12337, T5873
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17462
Summary: Fixes T12347. Ref T12314. Validation gets called no matter what, but is only relevant if the form supports subtypes.
Test Plan: Marked/unmarked a Paste form as editable.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12347, T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17457
Summary:
Ref T12335. See that task for discussion. Here are the behavioral changes:
- Statuses can be flagged with `locked`, which means that tasks in that status are locked to further discussion and interaction.
- A new "CAN_INTERACT" permission facilitates this. For most objects, "CAN_INTERACT" is just the same as "CAN_VIEW".
- For tasks, "CAN_INTERACT" is everyone if the status is a normal status, and no one if the status is a locked status.
- If a user doesn't have "Interact" permission:
- They can not submit the comment form.
- The comment form is replaced with text indicating "This thing is locked.".
- The "Edit" workflow prompts them.
This is a mixture of advisory and hard policy checks but sholuld represent a reasonable starting point.
Test Plan: Created a new "Locked" status, locked a task. Couldn't comment, saw lock warning, saw lock prompt on edit. Unlocked a task.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12335
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17453
Summary:
Ref T12335. Fixes T11207. Edit-like interactions which are not performed via "Edit <object>" are a bit of a grey area, policy-wise.
For example, you can correctly do these things to an object you can't edit:
- Comment on it.
- Award tokens.
- Subscribe or unsubscribe.
- Subscribe other users by mentioning them.
- Perform review.
- Perform audit.
- (Maybe some other stuff.)
These behaviors are all desirable and correct. But, particularly now that we offer stacked actions, you can do a bunch of other stuff which you shouldn't really be able to, like changing the status and priority of tasks you can't edit, as long as you submit the change via the comment form.
(Before the advent of stacked actions there were fewer things you could do via the comment form, and more of them were very "grey area", especially since "Change Subscribers" was just "Add Subscribers", which you can do via mentions.)
This isn't too much of a problem in practice because we won't //show// you those actions if the edit form you'd end up on doesn't have those fields. So on intalls like ours where we've created simple + advanced flows, users who shouldn't be changing task priorities generally don't see an option to do so, even though they technically could if they mucked with the HTML.
Change this behavior to be more strict: unless an action explicitly says that it doesn't need edit permission (comment, review, audit) don't show it to users who don't have edit permission and don't let them take the action.
Test Plan:
- As a user who could not edit a task, tried to change status via comment form; received policy exception.
- As a user who could not edit a task, viewed a comment form: no actions available (just "comment").
- As a user who could not edit a revision, viewed a revision form: only "review" actions available (accept, resign, etc).
- Viewed a commit form but these are kind of moot because there's no separate edit permission.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12335, T11207
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17452
Summary:
Ref T12314. Ref T6064. Ref T11580. If an install defines several different task create forms (like "Create Plant" and "Create Animal"), allow any of them to be created directly onto a workboard column.
This is just a general consistency improvement that makes Custom Forms and Workboards work together a bit better. We might do something fancier eventually for T6064 (which wants fewer clicks) and/or T11580 (which wants per-workboard control over forms or defaults).
Test Plan:
- Created several different types of tasks directly onto a workboard.
- Faked just one create form, saw the UI unchanged (except that it respects any renaming).
{F3492928}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314, T11580, T6064
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17446
Summary:
Ref T12314. When we pick an "Edit" form for a subtyped object, only consider forms with the same subtype.
For example, editing an "Animal" uses the forms with subtype "animal" which are marked as edit forms.
This also makes "Create Subtask" carry the parent task's type.
Test Plan:
- Edited an Animal, got an animal edit form.
- Edited a normal task, got a normal task form.
- Edited a paste, got the normal workflow.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17445
Summary:
Ref T12314. Allow tasks to be queried by subtype using a typeahead.
Open to a better default icon. I'll probably let you configure them later.
Just hide this constraint if there's only one subtype.
Test Plan:
- Searched for subtypes.
- Verified that the control hides if there is only one subtype.
{F3492293}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17444
Summary:
Ref T12314. If you set a form to have the "plant" subtype, then create a task with it, save "plant" as the task subtype.
For Conduit, the default subtype is used by default, but a new "subtype" transaction is exposed. You can apply this transaction at create time to create an object of a certain subtype, or at any later time to change the subtype of an object.
This still doesn't do anything particularly useful or interesting.
Test Plan:
- Created a non-subtyped object (a Paste).
- Created "task" and "plant" tasks via different forms.
- Created "default" and "plant" tasks via Conduit.
- Changed the subtype of a task via Conduit.
- Tried to set a bad subtype.
{F3492061}
{F3492066}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17443
Summary:
Ref T12314. This adds a "Change Form Subtype" workflow to the EditEngine form configuration screen, for forms that edit/create objects which support subtyping (for now, only tasks).
For example, this allows you to switch a form from being a "task" form to a "plant" or "animal" form.
Doing this doesn't yet do anything useful or interesting. I'm also not showing it in the UI yet since I'm not sure what we should make that look like (presumably, we should just echo whatever UI we end up with on tasks).
Test Plan:
- Changed the subtype of a task form.
- Verified that the "Change Subtype" action doesn't appear on other forms (for example, those for Pastes).
{F3491374}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17442
Summary: Ref T12314. Provides a field on tasks for storing subtypes. Does nothing interesting yet.
Test Plan:
- Ran storage upgrade.
- Created some tasks.
- Looked in the database.
- Used Conduit to query some tasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17441
Summary:
Ref T12314. Builds toward letting you define "animal" and "plant" tasks.
This just adds some configuration. I'll probably add some more quality-of-life options (like "icon") later but these are the only bits I'm sure I'll need.
Test Plan:
- Configured sensible subtypes.
- Tried to configure bad subtypes: bad key, missing "default", duplicate keys. Got sensible error messages.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17440
Summary:
Ref T12314. This adds storage so EditEngine forms can later be marked as edit fields for particular types of objects (like an "animal edit form" vs a "plant edit form").
We'll take you to the right edit form when you click "Edit" by selecting among forms with the same subtype as the task.
This doesn't do anything very interesting on its own.
Test Plan:
- Ran `bin/storage upgrade`.
- Verified database got the field with proper values.
- Created a new form, checked the database.
- Ran unit tests.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17439
Summary: Ref T6049. This moves Phurl to modular transactions.
Test Plan: Everything works here, add phurl, edit phurl, use phurl. Test various error states. Left a TODO on the validate dupe keys, not sure how to implement that in modular-land.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T6049
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17405
Summary:
Fixes T12302. Currently, we aren't merging multiple "AddAuditors" transactions correctly.
This can occur when Herald triggers multiple auditor rules.
Instead, merge them.
Test Plan:
- Wrote two different Herald rules that add auditors.
- Pushed a commit which triggered them.
- After the change, saw all the auditors get added correctly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12302
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17403
Summary:
Fixes T12172. Fixes T12060. This allows runtime code building CSS for mail to read CSS variables, then makes all the code do that.
It reverts the non-colorblind red/green to the colors in use before T12060, which seem better for non-colorblind users since no one really complained?
Test Plan:
- Viewed code diffs in Web UI.
- Viewed prose diffs in Web UI.
- Viewed code diffs in email.
- Viewed prose diffs in email.
All modes respected the accessibility color scheme.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12172, T12060
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17269
Summary:
Fixes T12301. In D17372, this changed to use generic EditEngines instead of the proper runtime engine. Normally this doesn't matter, but can in this case.
After loading the configurations normally, swap their attached engines for the specific configured runtime engine we're currently executing.
Test Plan: Clicked "Create Form" from the Maniphest form list, saw it go to "Create Maniphest Form", not "Create Generic Meta-Form".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12301
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17398
Summary: Ref T10390. Simplifies dropdown by rolling out canUseInPanel in useless panels
Test Plan: Add a query panel, see less options.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T10390
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17341
Summary:
Fixes T12281. Some forms (like Settings) can't actually create new objects. Currently, though, you can select them and add them to profile menus; if you do, they fail when building an item.
Kick them out of the typeahead, and decline to render them in menus.
Test Plan:
Added "Create Settings" to a menu, no longer fatals after patch (item vanished from menu, still editable normally to get rid of it).
Tried to add another "Create Settings", no longer available in typehaead.
Added some normal stuff.
Viewed a choose-among-forms dropdown in Maniphest, which still worked normally.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12281
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17372
Summary: Fixes T9336. Kind of a bit to back up and find the source, but works easily.
Test Plan: View feed, click on my image.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9336
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17322
Summary:
Ref T12128. This adds validation to menu items.
This feels a touch flimsy-ish (kind of copy/paste heavy?) but maybe it can be cleaned up a bit once some similar lightweight modular item types (build steps in Harbormaster, blueprints in Drydock) convert.
Test Plan:
- Tried to create each item with errors (no dashboard, no project, etc). Got appropriate form errors.
- Created valid items of each type.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12128
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17235
Summary: Ref T5867. Instead of hard-coding projects, tasks and repositories, let EditEngines say "I want a quick create item" so third-party code can also hook into the menu without upstream changes.
Test Plan: Saw same default items in menu.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5867
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17215
Summary: Fixes T6660. Uses the new stuff in Audit to build an EditEngine-aware icon.
Test Plan: {F2364304}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6660
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17208
