Summary:
Ref T2222. Ref T4484. See D8404 for discussion.
When a revision is updated with the new Editor, apply Herald rules. Additionally, apply them in a modern way which generates transactions.
Test Plan: {F122299}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, chad
Maniphest Tasks: T2222, T4484
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8405
Summary:
Ref T2222. Ref T4484. This is a stepping stone to getting Herald supported in the new Differental code. Generally:
- Instead of an Editor either supporting or not supporting Herald, let it choose based on transactions. Specifically, Differential only runs rules on revision creation and diff updates.
- Optionally, allow an Editor to return some transactions to apply instead of having to apply everything itself. This lets us make it clear why changes happend in the transaction log, and share more code.
- I updated only one transaction type (owners in Maniphest) since it was the easiest and cleanest to update and test. Everything else still works like it used to, it just won't generate a transaction record yet.
- The transaction records are a touch rough, but we can clean them up later.
Test Plan: {F122282}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4484, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8404
Summary:
Ref T2222. Five very small improvements:
- I hit this exception and it took a bit to understand which transaction was causing problems. Add an `Exception` subclass which does a better job of making the message debuggable.
- The `oldValue` of a transaction may be `null`, legitimately (for example, changing the `repositoryPHID` for a revision from `null` to some valid PHID). Do a check to see if `setOldValue()` has been called, instead of a check for a `null` value.
- Add an additional check for the other case (shouldn't have a value, but does).
- When we're not generating a value, don't bother calling the code to generate it. The best case scenario is that it has no effect; any effect it might have (changing the value) is always wrong.
- Maniphest didn't fall back to the parent correctly when computing this flag, so it got the wrong result for `CustomField` transactions.
Test Plan: Resolved the issue I was hitting more easily, made updates to a `null`-valued custom field, and applied other normal sorts of transactions successfully.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4557, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8401
Summary:
Fixes T4550 by changing supportsFeed to shouldPublishFeedStory, so things can be more granular like that are with mail. Attempts to fix things generally too, filtering out xactions that have no business in feed, etc.
Also return an updated Task HTML representation on drag and drop moves, etc. This is important so if the priority changes you can see it reflected in the UI.
Test Plan: dragged tasks around. observed no feed stories on subpriority drags. observed feed stories and updated color bars on stories that changed priority
Reviewers: epriestley, chad
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4550
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8399
Summary:
adds ManiphestTransaction::TYPE_PROJECT_COLUMN and makes it work. Had to clean up the Javascript ever so slightly as it was sending up the string "null" when it should just omit the data in these cases. Ref T4422.
NOTE: this is overall a bit buggy - e.g. move a task Foo from column A to top of column B; refresh; task Foo is at bottom of column B and should be at top of column B - but I plan on additional diff or three to clean this up.
Test Plan: dragged tasks around columns. clicked on those tasks and saw some nice transactions.
Reviewers: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4422
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8366
Summary:
Ref T2222. Differential has certain "words of power" (like `Ref T123` or `Depends on D345`) which should expand into a separate transaction when they appear anywhere in text.
Currently, they're respected in only some fields. I'm expanding them to work in any remarkup field, including comments and inline comments.
This partially generalizes transaction expansion/extraction in comments. Eventually, I'll probably implement some very soft sort of reference edge for T4036, maybe.
Test Plan: {F119368}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8369
Summary: Ref T2222. This updates the new JIRA field to be editable.
Test Plan: Used `/editpro/` to edit associated JIRA issues.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8364
Summary: Ref T2222. This enriches mail a little bit to get these rendering pretty much like they do now.
Test Plan: {F118255}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8343
Summary:
Ref T2222. This requires one new trick:
- When merging edge transactions which both add/update an edge, the Editor gets to control how the edge data is merged.
Specifically, we pick the "strongest" state to keep, so "accept + comment" leaves you with an accept instead of a comment.
Test Plan: Accepted, commented on, and comment + accepted revisions. Added some debugging dumps to verify that the merging was getting hit and working correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8340
Summary:
Ref T2222. This doesn't feel super clean, but doesn't feel too bad either.
Basically, Differential transactions can have secondary state-based effects (changing the overall revision status) when reviewers resign, are removed, accept, or reject revisions.
To deal with this in ApplicationTransactions, I did this:
- `applyFinalEffects()` can now alter the transaction set (notably, add new ones). This mostly matters for email, notifications and feed.
- In Differential, check for an overall revision state transition in `applyFinalEffects()` (e.g., your reject moving the revision to a rejected state).
- I'm only writing the transaction if the transition is implied and indirect.
- For example, if you "Plan Changes", that action changes the state on its own so there's no implicit state change transaction added.
The transactions themselves are kind of fluff, but it seems useful to keep a record of when state changes occurred in the transaction log. If people complain we can hide/remove them.
Test Plan: {F118143}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8339
Summary:
Ref T2222. This introduces two small new concepts:
- `expandTransactions()`: allows a transaction to expand into several transactions. For example, "resign" adds a "remove reviewers" transaction.
- We have some other cases which could use this, but currently hard-code things outside of the `Editor`.
- One example is that in Maniphest, closing a task implies claiming it if it is unowned.
- `setIgnoreOnNoEffect()`: The whole Editor can be set to continue or stop if any transactions have no effect, but this allows the behavior to be refined at the individual transaction level. This is primarily to make the UX less confusing, so the user gets only a single relevant error instead of one for each expanded transaction.
Otherwise, this is pretty straightforward.
Test Plan:
Rigged comment form to use SavePro controller, enabled resign action, then tried to resign from a bunch of stuff.
{F117743}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8328
Summary: Ref T2222. Makes the "pro" controller work with inlines.
Test Plan: Added a bunch of inlines and saved them with the "pro" controller.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8306
Summary: Ref T2222. Adds a mostly-functional "Pro" comment controller. This does the core stuff, but does not yet do actions (accept, reject, etc.) or inline comments.
Test Plan: Changed the `if (false)` to an `if (true)`, then made some comments, etc. This is normally unreachable.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8304
Summary:
Ref T3886. Ref T418.
- Adds "View Policy" and "Edit Policy" fields.
- Allows CustomFields to produce arbitrary types of transactions, so these fields can produce standard view/edit policy transactions and get all the strings and validation associated with them.
Test Plan: {F116001}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T418, T3886
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8287
Summary: so it was said in IRC and so it is true
Test Plan: saving maniphest tasks with custom fields no longer barfs
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8279
Summary:
Ref T4379. Fixes T4359. Currently, `bin/search index` does not rebuild CustomField indexes. This is because they aren't really part of the main search index. However, from a user's point of view this is by far the most logical place to look for index rebuilds, and it's straightforward for us to write into this secondary store.
At some point, it might be nice to let you specify fields as "fulltext" too, although no one has asked for that yet. We could then dump the text of those fields into the fulltext index. Ref T418.
Test Plan: Used `bin/search index --type proj --trace`, etc., and examination of the database to verify that indexes rebuilt. Reindexed users, tasks, projects.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4359, T418, T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8185
Summary:
Ref T4379. Currently, you can edit away your edit capability in Projects. Prevent this in a general way.
Since some objects have complex edit policies (like "the owner can always edit"), we can't just check the value itself. We also can't fairly assume that every object has a `setEditPolicy()` method, even though almost all do right now. Instead, provide a way to pretend we've completed the edit and changed the policy.
Test Plan: Unit tests, tried to edit away my edit capability.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8179
Summary:
Ref T4379. Perform all editing with modern transaction infrastructure. A few practical changes here:
- Message for "project name required" should be a little nicer. I'll deal with this once more stuff gets straightened out. You get a reasonable message now, it's just not nicely handled as part of the form.
- Message for "project name is not unique" should be a little nicer. Same as above.
- Previously, we would automatically archive a project when the last member left or was removed. I'll probably restore this in a bit but am omitting it for the moment for simplicity.
- Previously, we would create projects with goofy nonsensical permissions. Now we create them with reasonable permissions.
Test Plan:
- Created project.
- Edited project.
- Ran unit tests.
- Viewed project edit history.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8168
Summary:
Ref T4379. When you add a redundant edge, we currently compare the values strictly, using `===`. However, the old and new versions of the edge have slightly different member data, because one has been synthetically constructed and one has been read from the database.
Instead, compare only the things we actually care about:
# Were any destintations added or removed?
# Was any edge data changed?
If the answer to both questions is "no", consider the update a no-op.
Test Plan: In the next diff, I'm making project members use the EDGE transaction type. Before this change, adding an existing project member would generate a transaction with no changes. Now, it is correctly detected as a no-op, while normal transactions continue to work properly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8166
Summary: ...and surface it in all adapters except commit adapters. Values are true or false. Ref T4294
Test Plan: made a herald rule to be cc'd on new tasks. was cc'd on new tasks and not cc'd on updates to existing tasks.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4294
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8142
Summary:
Ref T4175.
- Add a configurable name for the clone-as directory, so you can have "Bits & Pieces" clone as "bits~n~pieces/" or simliar.
- By default, use "reasonable" heruistics to choose such a name.
- Generate a copy/pasteable clone commmand with this directory name.
Test Plan: Looked at some repositories.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4175
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8097
Summary: Fixes T3857. Earlier work made this trivial and just left product questions, which I've answered by requiring the daemons to run on reasonable installs.
Test Plan: Ran `bin/search index` and `bin/search index --background`. Observed indexes write in the former case and tasks queue in the latter case. Commented with a unique string on a revision and searched for it a moment later, got exactly one result (that revision), verifying that reindexing works correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3857
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7966
Summary:
Ref T4122. Implements a credential management application for the uses described in T4122.
@chad, this needs an icon, HA HA HAHA HA BWW HA HA HA
bwahaha
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4122
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7608
Summary:
This is primarily a client request, and a little bit use-case specific, but policies seem to be holding up well and I'm getting more comfortable about maintaining this. Much if it can run through ApplicationTransactions.
Allow the ability to edit status, policies, priorities, assignees and projects of a task to be restricted to some subset of users. Also allow bulk edit to be locked. This affects the editor itself and the edit, view and list interfaces.
Test Plan: As a restricted user, created, edited and commented on tasks. Tried to drag them around.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7357
Summary:
We have this commented-out chunk of code now which was originally buggy and is now just nonfunctional.
For now, the core edit types don't always require CAN_EDIT (e.g., subscribe, comment, add edges), except for editing the edit policy itself, which always does. Add a supplemental capability check there and let everything else go through with CAN_VIEW. We can buff the policy checks on application editors over time, they all require appropriate capabilities to get to in the first place anyway.
Test Plan: Created and edited some tasks without getting overwhelmed with policy exceptions.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7351
Summary: Ref T603. Fixes T3921. Tightens up policy controls for file/object relationships in existing applications.
Test Plan:
- Uploaded new project image, verified it got an edge to the project.
- Uploaded new profile image, verified it got an edge to me.
- Uploaded new macro image, verified it got an edge to the macro.
- Uploaded new paste via web UI and conduit, verified it got attached.
- Replaced, added images to a mock, verified they got edges.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3921, T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7254
Summary: Ref T603. When a user comments on an object with an embedded file, write an "attached" edge.
Test Plan: Made a comment on a task with an embedded file, verified the edge was written in Files.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7191
Summary: ...and deploy on Maniphest. Ref T1638.
Test Plan: created a herald rule to be cc'd for tasks created via web. made a task via web and another via email and was cc'd appropriately. edited the herald to be cc'd for tasks created via not web. made 2 tasks again and got cc'd appropriately
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1638
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7145
Summary:
We currently try to send Maniphest email "To" the owner and actor, but for unassigned tasks there is no owner.
Just filter the PHIDs in the parent, since it's reasonable for subclasses to be liberal about construction here.
Test Plan: Commented on an unassigned task, got an email without a bogus "To".
Reviewers: btrahan, asherkin
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7129
Summary: Ref T2217. Pro is the new standard.
Test Plan: Lots of `grep`, made a pile of Maniphest views/edits.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7093
Summary: Ref T2217. This is essentially the last writer, should be able to start deleting code now.
Test Plan: Used "Edit Task" to make a bunch of task edits.
Reviewers: btrahan, garoevans
Reviewed By: garoevans
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7090
Summary: Ref T2217. Nothing too surprising here. This transaction type is weird and should be replaced with the mainstream EDGE type at some point after things clear up more.
Test Plan: Attached and detached revisions and mocks.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7085
Summary:
Ref T2217. Ship "Merge in Duplicates" through the new editor. The only notable thing here is `setContinueOnMissingFields()`.
The problem this solves is that if you add a custom field and mark it as required, all existing tasks are "invalid" since they don't have a value, and trying to edit them will raise an error like "Some Custom Field is required!". This is fine for normal edits via the UI, since the user can just select/provide a value, but surgical edits to specific fields should just ignore these errors. Add the ability to ignore these errors and use it on all the field-speific editors.
Test Plan: Merged duplicates, including "invalid" duplicates with missing fields.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7084
Summary: Ref T2217. All the reads route through new code already, start swapping writes over. This is the simplest writer, used when the user drag-and-drops stuff on the task list.
Test Plan: Dragged and dropped stuff across priorities. Got a transaction and some email. Verified the email and transaction looked OK, threaded properly, etc.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7080
Summary:
Ref T418. This is fairly messy, but basically:
- Add a validation phase to TransactionEditor.
- Add a validation phase to CustomField.
- Bring it to StandardField.
- Add validation logic for the int field.
- Provide support in related classes.
Test Plan: See screenshot.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T418
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7028
Summary:
Ref T2625. Ref T3794. Ref T418. Ref T1703.
This is a more general version of D5278. It expands CustomField support to include real integration with ApplicationSearch.
Broadly, custom fields may elect to:
- build indicies when objects are updated;
- populate ApplicationSearch forms with new controls;
- read inputs entered into those controls out of the request; and
- apply constraints to search queries.
Some utility/helper stuff is provided to make this easier. This part could be cleaner, but seems reasonable for a first cut. In particular, the Query and SearchEngine must manually call all the hooks right now instead of everything happening magically. I think that's fine for the moment; they're pretty easy to get right.
Test Plan:
I added a new searchable "Company" field to People:
{F58229}
This also cleaned up the disable/reorder view a little bit:
{F58230}
As it did before, this field appears on the edit screen:
{F58231}
However, because it has `search`, it also appears on the search screen:
{F58232}
When queried, it returns the expected results:
{F58233}
And the actually good bit of all this is that the query can take advantage of indexes:
mysql> explain SELECT * FROM `user` user JOIN `user_customfieldstringindex` `appsearch_0` ON `appsearch_0`.objectPHID = user.phid AND `appsearch_0`.indexKey = 'mk3Ndy476ge6' AND `appsearch_0`.indexValue IN ('phacility') ORDER BY user.id DESC LIMIT 101;
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+-------------------+----------+---------+------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+
| id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra |
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+-------------------+----------+---------+------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+
| 1 | SIMPLE | appsearch_0 | ref | key_join,key_find | key_find | 232 | const,const | 1 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort |
| 1 | SIMPLE | user | eq_ref | phid | phid | 194 | phabricator2_user.appsearch_0.objectPHID | 1 | |
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+-------------------+----------+---------+------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T418, T1703, T2625, T3794
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6992
Summary: Deploy on paste and macro for create stories, 'cuz those are boring emails. Fixes T3808.
Test Plan: made a paste and a macro. commented on 'em. verified i got mail on comments only.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3808
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6988
Summary: Ref T603. Killing this class is cool because the classes that replace it are policy-aware. Tried to keep my wits about me as I did this and fixed a few random things along the way. (Ones I remember right now are pulling a query outside of a foreach loop in Releeph and fixing the text in UIExample to note that the ace of hearts if "a powerful" card and not the "most powerful" card (Q of spades gets that honor IMO))
Test Plan: tested the first few changes (execute, executeOne X handle, object) then got real mechanical / careful with the other changes.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, aran, FacebookPOC
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6941
Summary: Ref T2766. Does the integration via ApplicationTransactionsEditor. Only did addCC and Flag for proof of concept.
Test Plan: Made a rule to cc, made a rule to flag. They worked! (will attach screens to diff)
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2766
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6766
Summary: Currently, we check that the user can view and edit their own transaction, which is always true. Instead, check that they can view the object. I'll fix this with a more tailored check against the EDIT capability that's per-transaction later.
Test Plan: Applying no transactions no longer fatals with undefined `$xaction`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6754
Summary:
Ref T1703. Ref T3718. The `PhabricatorCustomFieldList` seems like a pretty good idea. Move more code into it to make it harder to get wrong.
Also the sequencing on old/new values for these transactions was a bit off; fix that up.
Test Plan: Edited standard and custom profile fields.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1703, T3718
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6751
Summary: Fixes T2654.
Test Plan: attached lots of mocks and tasks to one another from both maniphest and pholio. verified transactions rendered okay in both applications
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T2654
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6501
Summary:
Nice title. We add three new transactions - IMAGE_FILE, IMAGE_NAME, and IMAGE_DESCRIPTION. The first is a bit like subscribers as it is a list of file phids. The latter have values of the form ($file_phid => $data), where $data is $name or $description respectively. This is because we need to collate transactions based on $file_phid...
Overall, this uses the _underyling files_ and not the "PholioImage" to determine if things are unique or not. That said, simply mark PholioImages as obsolete so inline comments about no-longer applicable PholioImages don't break.
Does a reasonable job implementing the mock. Note you can't "update" an image at this time, though you can delete and add at will.
Test Plan: played with pholio a ton.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: chad, aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3489
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6441
Summary: in applyExternalEffects, for subscriber transactions, we now re-load subscribers. also fixes a bug where a user can get emailed 2x when they take an action on a mock they created.
Test Plan: made some mocks. verified one copy sent to creator and one to each subscriber. (note having problems with email so I verified the phids mail was supposed to be sent to and did not get the actual email delivered)
Reviewers: epriestley, chad
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3315
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6206
Summary:
Adds a profile edit controller (with just one field and on links to it) that uses ApplicationTransactions and CustomField.
{F45617}
My plan is to move the other profile fields to this interface and get rid of Settings -> Profile. Basically, these will be "settings":
- Sex
- Language
- Timezone
These will be "profile":
- Real Name
- Title
- Blurb
- Profile Image (but I'm going to put this on a separate UI)
- Other custom fields
Test Plan: Edited my realname using the new interface.
Reviewers: chad, seporaitis
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6152
Summary:
None of this code is reachable yet. See discussion in D6147. Ref T1703.
Provide tighter integration between ApplicationTransactions and CustomField. Basically, I'm just trying to get all the shared stuff into the base implementation.
Test Plan: Code not reachable.
Reviewers: chad, seporaitis
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1703
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6149
