Summary:
WMF ran into this after their update. Here's the setup:
- When you enable Spaces, we leave all existing objects set to `null`, which means "these belong to the default space". This is so we don't have to go update a trillion objects.
- New objects get set to the default space explicitly (`PHID-SPCE-...`) but older ones stay with `null`.
- If you edit an older object (like a task) from the time before Spaces, //and// the form doesn't have a Visbility/Spaces control, we would incorrectly poplate the value with `null` when the effective value should be the default space PHID.
- This caused a "You must choose a space." error in the UI.
Instead, populate the control with the effective value instead of the literal database value. This makes the edit go through cleanly.
Also add a note about this for future-me.
Test Plan:
- Disabled "Visibility" control in task edit form.
- Edited an old task which had `null` as a `spacePHID` in the database.
- Before patch: UI error about selecting a Space.
- After patch: edit goes through cleanly.
Reviewers: chad, 20after4
Reviewed By: chad, 20after4
Subscribers: 20after4, aklapper
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15306
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:
At least for now, the "Space" field is just a subfield of the "Visible To" field, so:
- it doesn't get any separate settings; and
- it always uses the "Visible To" settings.
Test Plan:
- Created a form with a hidden view policy field.
- Created stuff with no "you must pick a space" errors.
- Created stuff with a normal form.
- Prefilled "Space" on a noraml form.
- Verified that trying to prefill "Space" on a form with "Visible To" hidden does nothing.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14812
Summary:
Ref T9964. Three goals here:
- Make it easier to supply Conduit documentation.
- Make automatic documentation for `*.edit` endpoints more complete, particularly for custom fields.
- Allow type resolution via Conduit types, so you can pass `["alincoln"]` to "subscribers" instead of needing to use PHIDs.
Test Plan:
- Viewed and used all search and edit endpoints, including custom fields.
- Used parameter type resolution to set subscribers to user "dog" instead of "PHID-USER-whatever".
- Viewed HTTP parameter documentation.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14796
Summary: Fixes T9988. This logic got inverted by accident at some point.
Test Plan:
- Edited a task, shifting spaces.
- Created a task in default space.
- Created a task in custom space.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9988
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14787
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. Fixes T5622. This allows you to copy some fields (projects, subscribers, custom fields, some per-application) from another object when creating a new object by passing the `?template=xyz` parameter.
Extend "copy" support to work with all custom fields.
Test Plan:
- Created new pastes, packages, tasks using `?template=...`
- Viewed new template docs page.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5622, T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14699
Summary:
Ref T9132. Currently, EditEngine had some branchy-`instanceof` code like this:
```
if ($object instanceof Whatever) {
do_magic();
}
if ($object instanceof SomethingElse) {
do_other_magic();
}
```
...where `Whatever` and `SomethingElse` are first-party applications like ProjectsInterface and SubscribersInterface.
This kind of code is generally bad because third-parties can't add new stuff, and it suggest something is kind of hacky in its architecture. Ideally, we would eventually get rid of almost all of this.
T9789 is a similar discussion of this for the next layer down (`TransactionEditor`) and plans to get rid of branchy-instanceofs there too.
Since I'm about to add more stuff here (for Custom Fields), split it out first so I'm not digging us any deeper than I already dug us.
Broadly, this allows third-party extensions to add fields to every EditEngine UI if they want, like we do for Policies, Subscribers, Projects and Comments today (and CustomFields soon).
Test Plan:
{F1007575}
- Observed that all fields still appear on the form and seem to work correctly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14599
