Summary: Ref T6027. This adds human-readable rendering for the new `TYPE_COLUMNS` core transactions.
Test Plan: {F1207784}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6027
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15635
Summary:
Ref T6027. We currently have two different transaction types:
- `TYPE_PROJECT_COLUMNS` does most of the work, but has a sort of weird structure and isn't really suitable for API use.
- `TYPE_COLUMN` is this weird, junk transaction which mostly just creates the other transaction.
Merge them into a single higher-level `TYPE_COLUMNS` transaction which works properly and has a sensible structure and comprehensive error checking.
Remaining work here:
- I've removed the old rendering logic, but not yet added new logic. I need to migrate the old transaction types and add new rendering logic.
- Although the internal representation is now //suitable// for use in the API, it isn't properly exposed yet.
Test Plan:
- Created tasks into a column.
- Ran unit tests.
- Moved tasks between columns.
- Will perform additional testing in followups.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6027
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15634
Summary: View various conduit pages and update to new UI and add calls to newPage
Test Plan: View list, view method, make a call.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15613
Summary: Cleans up EditEngine, adds new layout to EditEngine and descendents
Test Plan: Test creating a new form, reordering, marking and unmarking defaults. View new forms.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15531
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: See D15432. There, we can use this test to check if the user //could// reassign the task by using "Edit Form" or the stacked actions, so any dedicated "claim" element is consistent with the other permissions.
Test Plan:
- Added a `var_dump($can_reassign)` after the call.
- Saw `true`.
- Edited the edit form, locked and disabled "Assigned To".
- Saw `false`.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15433
Summary:
Fixes T10519. Two issues:
First, the acting user wasn't explicitly included in the mail. This usually didn't matter, but could matter if you unsubscribed and then interacted.
Second, we had some logic which tried to hide redundant "added inline comment" transactions, but could hide them inappropriately. In particular, if another action (like a subscribe) was present in the same group, we could hide the inlines because of that other transaction, then //also// hide the subscribe. This particular issue is likely an unintended consequence of hiding self-subscribes.
Instead of hiding inlines if //anything else// happened, hide them only if:
- there is another "added a comment" transaction; or
- there is another "added an inline comment" transaction.
This prevents the root issue in T10519 (incorrectly hiding every transaction, and thus not sending the mail) and should generally make behavior a little more consistent and future-proof.
Test Plan:
- Submitted //only// an inline comment on a commit I had not previously interacted with.
- Before patch: no mail was generated (entire mail was improperly hidden).
- After patch: got some mail with my comment.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10519
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15407
Summary:
Ref T10457. Fixes T10024. This primarily just modernizes blueprints to use EditEngine.
This also fixes T10024, which was an issue with stored properties not being flagged correctly.
Also slightly improves typeaheads for blueprints (more information, disabled state).
Test Plan:
- Created and edited various types of blueprints.
- Set and removed limits.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10024, T10457
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15390
Summary: Full new UI, testing some upcoming treatments for consideration in other View controllers. Small tweaks to allow PHUITwoColumnView to have fixed and fluid width, and let TransactionCommentView go fullWidth.
Test Plan:
Tested a number of Ponder cases, New Question, with and without summary, with and without answers, with and without comments. Mobile, Tablet, and Desktop layouts. Verify Project and Profile UI's still in tact.
{F1120961}
{F1120962}
{F1120963}
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15315
Summary:
Fixes T10410. Immediate impact of this is that you can now actually delete properties from Almanac services, devices and bindings.
The meat of the change is switching from CustomField to EditEngine for most of the actual editing logic. CustomField creates a lot of problems with using EditEngine for everything else (D15326), and weird, hard-to-resolve bugs like this one (not being able to delete stuff).
Using EditEngine to do this stuff instead seems like it works out much better -- I did this in ProfilePanel first and am happy with how it looks.
This also makes the internal storage for properties JSON instead of raw text.
Test Plan:
- Created, edited and deleted properties on services, devices and bindings.
- Edited and reset builtin properties on repository services.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10410
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15327
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: Moves all the one off object calls to PHUIRemarkupView, adds a "Document" call as well (future plans).
Test Plan: Visited most pages I could get access to, but may want extra careful eyes on this diff.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15281
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: Fixes T10347. In the long run maybe we'll try to guess this better, but for now get rid of the "Milestone X" hardcode and just show what the last one was called.
Test Plan:
- Created the first milestone for a project.
- Created the nth milestone for a project.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10347
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15262
Summary:
Ref T4427.
- New config option for labels, enabling, etc., but no UI/niceness yet.
- When enabled, add a field.
- Allow nonnegative values, including fractional values.
- EditEngine is nice and Conduit / actions basically just work with a tiny bit of extra support code.
Test Plan:
- Edited points via "Edit".
- Edited points via Conduit.
- Edited points via stacked actions.
- Tried to set "zebra" points.
- Tried to set -1 points.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T4427
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15220
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: Mostly for consistency, we're not using other forms of icons and this makes all classes that use an icon call it in the same way.
Test Plan: tested uiexamples, lots of other random pages.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15125
Summary: Ref T10168. When we render this control, we currently don't put commas into the value correctly if there are multiple alternative hashtags.
Test Plan: Edited a project with multiple alternate hashtags. Before change: they all got smushed together. After change: properly comma-separated.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10168
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15045
Summary:
Ref T10054. This does a big chunk of the legwork to let users reconfigure profile menus (currently, just project menus).
This includes:
- Editing builtin items (e.g., you can rename the default items).
- Creating new items (for now, only links are available).
This does not yet include:
- Hiding items.
- Reordering items.
- Lots of fancy types of items (dashboards, etc).
- Any UI changes.
- Documentation (does feature: TODO link for documentation).
Test Plan:
{F1060695}
{F1060696}
{F1060697}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10054
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15010
Summary:
Fixes T10117.
- I accidentally broke setting `null` to unassign tasks at some point when I added richer validation.
- Raise a better error if the user passes junk.
Test Plan:
- Unassigned a task via API and web UI.
- Reassigned a task via API and web UI.
- Tried to do an invalid assign via API, got a sensible error.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10117
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14992
Summary:
Ref T10010.
- Default name to "Milestone X".
- Remove policy controls, which have no effect.
- Don't generate slugs for milestones since this is a big pain where they all generate as `#milestone_1` by default (you can add one if you want). I plan to add some kind of syntax like `#parent/32` to mean "Milestone 32 in Parent" later.
- Don't require projects to have unique names (again, 900 copies of "Milestone X"). I think we can trust users to sort this out for themselves since modern Phabricator has "Can Create Projects" permission, etc.
Test Plan: Created some milestones, had a less awful experience.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10010
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14909
Summary:
Ref T9897. This one is a little more involved because of how getting a post on a blog works.
I also changed moving posts to be a real transaction (which shows up in history, now).
Test Plan: Created posts from web UI and conduit.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9897
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14902
Summary: Ref T10010. This is pretty straightforward with a couple of very minor new behaviors, like the icon selector edit field.
Test Plan:
- Created projects.
- Edited projects.
- Saw "Create Project" in quick create menu.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10010
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14896
Summary: Ref T10004. This primarily supports moving Phame to EditEngine.
Test Plan: {F1045166}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14887
Summary:
Ref T3967. This gives us a reasonable baseline for doing remarkup previews inline in all contexts, and works in weird/constrained context including:
- inline comments;
- conpherence; and
- custom fields.
It would be nicer to go beyond this in contexts like Phame posts, but this is a start, at least.
Test Plan:
{F1040877}
{F1040878}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T3967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14855
Summary: These transactions (when a user subscribes or unsubscribes only themselves) are universally uninteresting.
Test Plan:
- Subscribed/unsubscribed, saw transactions but no feed/mail.
- Commented, got implicitly subscribed, saw only comment in feed/mail, saw both transasctions on task.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14853
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 T9979. This is currently hard-coded but can be done in a generic way.
This has one minor behavioral changes: answer text is no longer included in the question text index in Ponder. I'm not planning to accommodate that for now since I don't want to dig this hole any deeper than I already have. This behavior should be different anyway (e.g., index the answer, then show the question in the results or something).
Test Plan:
- Put a unique word in a Maniphest comment.
- Searched for the word.
- Found the task.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14837
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 T9979. Convert all DestructionEngine behaviors to extensions.
Test Plan:
{F1033244}
Destroyed an object, verifying:
- Herald transcripts were destroyed;
- edges were destroyed;
- flags were destroyed;
- tokens were destroyed;
- transactions were destroyed;
- worker tasks were cancelled.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14832
Summary:
Ref T9979. The general shape of "engine" code feels pretty good, and I plan to move indexing to be more in line with other modern engines, with the ultimate goal of supporting subprojects (T10010) and several intermediate goals.
Before moving indexing, clean up Destruction, since some of the new indexes will need destruction hooks and destruction currently has a lot of `instanceof` stuff that should be easy to fix by applying more modern approaches.
Test Plan:
- Used `bin/remove destroy` to destory an Almanac device.
- Verified that properties for the device were destroyed.
- Viewed module panel in UI.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14831
Summary:
Fixes T10012. The permissions here are little weird: you need edit permission on the //configurations//, not the //engines//. I was checking edit permission on the engines only.
I should possibly make this a bit more consistent, the engine edit permission is just very convenient to use to enforce object create permission right now. I'll likely clean this up after T9789.
Test Plan:
- Tried to reorder forms as a less-privileged user, got proper policy errors.
- Reordered forms normally as a regular user.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: Luke081515.2
Maniphest Tasks: T10012
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14824
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. Happy to take another approach here or just not bother, this just struck me as a little ambiguous/confusing.
Test Plan:
Before, not necessarily clear that the "Create Task" header only applies to the first few items.
{F1029126}
After, more clear:
{F1029127}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14815
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 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 T9964. Create some docuemntation for this stuff, and clean up the *.edit endpoints a bit.
Test Plan: Read documentation.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14798
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:
See T9905#148799. The CommentEditField generated empty comment transactions; these are dropped later, but before they are dropped they would trigger implicit CCs.
The implicit CC rule should probably be narrower, but we shouldn't be generating these transactions in the first place.
Test Plan: No longer implicitly CC'd on a task when doing something minor like changing projects.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: avivey
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14795
Summary:
Ref T9964.
- New mechanism for rich documentation on unusual/complicated edits.
- Add some docs to `paths.set` since it's not self-evident what you're supposed to pass in.
Test Plan: {F1027177}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14791
Summary: Ref T9964. Fixes T9752. Provides API access to enable/disable packages and change their paths.
Test Plan:
- Changed status via Conduit.
- Changed paths via Conduit.
- Tried to change a path use a nonsense/bogus repository PHID, got an error.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9752, T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14790
Summary:
Ref T9908. Fixes T6205.
This is largely some refactoring to improve the code. The new structure is:
- Each EditField has zero or one "submit" (normal edit form) controls.
- Each EditField has zero or one "comment" (stacked actions) controls.
- If we want more than one in the future, we'd just add two fields.
- Each EditField can have multiple EditTypes which provide Conduit transactions.
- EditTypes are now lower-level and less involved on the Submit/Comment pathways.
Test Plan:
- Added and removed projects and subscribers.
- Changed task statuses.
- In two windows: added some subscribers in one, removed different ones in the other. The changes did not conflict.
- Applied changes via Conduit.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6205, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14789
Summary: Ref T9964. Add a `setIsConduitOnly()` method so we can mark a field as API-only.
Test Plan:
- Created and edited pastes via web UI (no status field).
- Adjusted status via web UI action.
- Adjusted status via Conduit API.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14788
Summary: Ref T9983. This method is spelled wrong.
Test Plan: Hit this case, got a dialog instead of a fatal.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9983
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14786
Summary:
Ref T9980. No magic here, just write a little bit about how to find outdated callers. Update the technical doc.
Also:
- Fix an unrelated bug where you couldn't leave comments if an object had missing, required, custom fields.
- Restore the ConduitConnectionLog table so `bin/storage adjust` doesn't complain.
Test Plan: Read docs.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9980
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14784
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 T9964. We have various kinds of secondary data on objects (like subscribers, projects, paste content, Owners paths, file attachments, etc) which is somewhat slow, or somewhat large, or both.
Some approaches to handling this in the API include:
- Always return all of it (very easy, but slow).
- Require users to make separate API calls to get each piece of data (very simple, but inefficient and really cumbersome to use).
- Implement a hierarchical query language like GraphQL (powerful, but very complex).
- Kind of mix-and-match a half-power query language and some extra calls? (fairly simple, not too terrible?)
We currently mix-and-match internally, with `->needStuff(true)`. This is not a general-purpose, full-power graph query language like GraphQL, and it occasionally does limit us.
For example, there is no way to do this sort of thing:
$conpherence_thread_query = id(new ConpherenceThreadQuery())
->setViewer($viewer)
// ...
->setNeedMessages(true)
->setWhenYouLoadTheMessagesTheyNeedProfilePictures(true);
However, we almost never actually need to do this and when we do want to do it we usually don't //really// want to do it, so I don't think this is a major limit to the practical power of the system for the kinds of things we really want to do with it.
Put another way, we have a lot of 1-level hierarchical queries (get pictures or repositories or projects or files or content for these objects) but few-to-no 2+ level queries (get files for these objects, then get all the projects for those files).
So even though 1-level hierarchies are not a beautiful, general-purpose, fully-abstract system, they've worked well so far in practice and I'm comfortable moving forward with them in the API.
If we do need N-level queries in the future, there is no technical reason we can't put GraphQL (or something similar) on top of this eventually, and this would represent a solid step toward that. However, I suspect we'll never need them.
Upshot: I'm pretty happy with "->needX()" for all practical purposes, so this is just adding a way to say "->needX()" to the API.
Specifically, you say:
```
{
"attachments": {
"subscribers": true,
}
}
```
...and get back subscriber data. In the future (or for certain attachments), `true` might become a dictionary of extra parameters, if necessary, and could do so without breaking the API.
Test Plan:
- Ran queries to get attachments.
{F1025449}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14772
Summary:
Ref T9964. The new `*.search` and `*.edit` methods generate documentation which depends on the viewer.
For example, the `*.search` methods show a reference table of the keys for all your saved queries.
Give them a real viewer to work with.
During normal execution, just populate this viewer with the request's viewer, so `$request->getViewer()` and `$this->getViewer()` both work and mean the same thing.
Test Plan: {F1023780}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9964
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14761
Summary:
Ref T9132. I think the featureset is approximatley stable, so here's some documentation.
I also cleaned up a handful of things in the UI and tried to make them more obvious or more consistent.
Test Plan: Read documentation.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14718
Summary: Ref T9908. This is the last of the things that need to swap over.
Test Plan:
- Created tasks from a workboard.
- Created tasks in different columns.
- Edited tasks.
- Used `?parent=..`.
- Verified that default edit form config now affects comment actions.
- No more weird comment thing on forms, at least for now.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14715
Summary: Ref T9908. Fixes T8903. This moves the inline edit from task lists (but not from workboards) over to editengine.
Test Plan:
- Edited a task from a draggable list.
- Edited a task from an undraggable list.
- Edited a task, changed projects, saw refresh show correct projects.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8903, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14711
Summary: Ref T9908. This fixes "Create Subtask" so it works with the new stuff. Mostly straightforward.
Test Plan: Created some subtasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14706
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. 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 T9908. When there are custom / renamed / policy considerations for applications, respect them in the quick create menu.
This has some performance implications, in that it makes every page slower by two queries (and potentially more, soon), which is quite bad. I have some ideas to mitigate this, but it's not the end of the world to eat these queries for now.
Test Plan: {F1017316}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14693
Summary:
Ref T9908.
- You should not need edit permission on a task in order to comment on it.
- At least for now, ignore any customization in Conduit and Stacked Actions. These UIs always use the full edit form as it's written in the application.
Test Plan:
- Verified a non-editor can now comment on tasks they can see.
- Verified a user still can't use an edit form they can't see.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14691
Summary: I wrote this earlier in D14680 but have now realized that it's the same sentence twice when read carefully.
Test Plan: read more carefully
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14687
Summary:
Fixes T7250. Currently, if a display group of transactions (multiple transactions by the same author in a short period of time with no intervening comments) has several transactions of similar strength (e.g., several status change transactions) we can end up displaying them in reverse chronological order, which is confusing.
Instead, make sure transactions of the same type/strength are always in logical order.
Test Plan:
- Merged a task into another task, then reopened the merged task.
- Before patch: merge/reopen showed in wrong order.
{F1014954}
- After patch: merge/reopen show in correct order.
{F1014955}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T7250
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14680
Summary:
Ref T9132. Fixes T4580. Thhat might actually have been fixed a while ago or something since it describes a buggy/bad interaction which doesn't reproduce for me at HEAD.
This saves and restores all the stacked actions (subscribers, projects, etc) so that you don't lose anything if you close a window by accident.
Test Plan:
Added a bunch of actions in various states, reloaded the page, draft stuck around.
Submitted form, actions didn't stick around anymore.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T4580, T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14675
Summary:
Ref T9132. We currently have an old preview/draft behavior and a new actions behavior.
Let the actions behavior do drafts/previews too, so we can eventually throw away the old thing.
This is pretty much just copying the old behavior into the new one, but with a few tweaks. The major change is that we submit all the stacked actions behavior now, so the preview reflects everything the change will do (and, soon, we can save it in the draft in a consistent way).
Also includes one hack-fix that I'll clean up at some point.
Test Plan: Added a bunch of stacked actions and observed meaningful previews.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14672
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 is kind of a mess because the tokenizer rewrite left rendering tokenizers in Javascript a little rough. This causes bugs like icons not showing up on tokens in the "Policy" dialog, which there's a task for somewhere I think.
I think I've fixed it enough that the beahavior is now correct (i.e., icons show up properly), but some of the code is a bit iffy. I'll eventually clean this up properly, but it's fairly well contained for now.
Test Plan:
- Reassigned a task.
- Put a task up for grabs.
- No reassign on closed tasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14669
Summary: Ref T9132. Supports selects in stacked actions and adds "Change Status" + "Change Priority".
Test Plan: Changed status and priority from stacked actions.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14667
Summary:
Ref T9132. Only allow a task to have a single owner in the UI.
In Conduit, make this field appear and behave as "phid" instead of "list<phid>".
Test Plan: Edited a task with new fancy form, got limited to one owner. Assigned/unassigned. Used Conduit to assign/unassign.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14666
Summary: Ref T9132. This makes the "Quote" action on comments work properly in these applications.
Test Plan: Quoted text in each application.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14665
Summary: Ref T9132. Shhh this never happened shhhhhhh.
Test Plan: Selected multiple actions, saw them add at the bottom.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14664
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. Fixes T5031. This approximately implements the plan described in T5031#67988:
When we recieve a preview request, don't write a draft if the form is from a version of the object before the last update the viewer made.
This should fix the race-related (?) zombie draft comments that sometimes show up.
I just added a new object for this stuff to make it easier to do stacked actions (or whatever we end up with) a little later, since I needed to do some schema adjustments anyway.
Test Plan:
- Typed some text.
- Reloaded page.
- Draft stayed there.
- Tried real hard to get it to ghost by submitting stuff in multiple windows and typing a lot and couldn't, although I didn't bother specifically narrowing down the race condition.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5031, T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14640
Summary:
Ref T9132. This just replaces the "Add Comment" form in Paste with a generic flow in EditEngine.
No actual field-awareness or action stacking or anything quite yet, but that will come in a bit. This mildly regresses drafts (which don't seem like a big deal for Pastes). I'll hook those up again in the next diff, but I want to build them in a better way that will work with multiple actions in a generic way, and solve T5031.
Big practical advantage here is that applications don't need copy/pasted preview controllers.
Test Plan:
- Saw previews.
- Added comments.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14637
Summary: Seeing if this is the correct path, then will apply in Pholio, Ponder.
Test Plan: epriestley
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: joshuaspence, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9825
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14646
Summary:
Ref T9132. Give most standard custom fields reasonable Conduit support so you can use the new `application.x` endpoints to set them.
Major missing field type is dates, again.
Test Plan: Used Conduit to set various custom fields on a package.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14635
Summary:
Ref T9132. This allows you to prefill custom fields with `?custom.x.y=value`, for most types of custom fields.
Dates (which are substantially more complicated) aren't supported. I'll just do those once the dust settles. Other types should work, I think.
Test Plan:
- Verified custom fields appear on "HTTP Parameters" help UI.
- Used `?x=y` to prefill custom fields on edit form.
- Performed various normal edits.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14634
Summary:
Ref T9132. This isn't perfect, but doesn't break any existing functionality. This stuff works:
- Editing values.
- Reordering fields.
- All builtin field tyepes.
This stuff may not work yet:
- Assigning custom field defaults.
- Some conduit stuff.
- Fully custom fields?
- Locking/hiding fields? Didn't actually test this one.
I'll keep chipping away at that stuff. In some cases, it may be easier to convert all the CustomField apps first, although Differential might be a fair bit of work.
Test Plan:
Created a bunch of custom fields of every avialable type and edited them.
{F1008789}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14617
Summary:
Ref T9132. This is a bit more cleanup to make adding CustomField support easier.
Right now, both `EditField` and `EditType` can actually generate a transaction. This doesn't matter too much in practice today, but gets a little more complicated a couple of diffs from now with CustomField stuff.
Instead, always use `EditType` to generate the transaction. In the future, this should give us less total code and make more things work cleanly by default.
Test Plan: Used web UI and Conduit to make various edits to pastes, including doing race-condition tests on "Projects".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14607
Summary: Ref T9132. I had some hacks in place for dealing with Edge/Subscribers stuff. Clean that up so it's structured a little better.
Test Plan:
- Edited subscribers and projects.
- Verified things still show up in Conduit.
- Made concurrent edits (added a project in one window, removed it in another window, got a clean result with a correct merge of the two edits).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14601
Summary:
Ref T9132. This is a quality-of-life improvement for new `application.edit` endpoints.
Instead of strictly requiring PHIDs, allow IDs or monograms. This primarily makes these endpoints easier to test and use.
Test Plan: Edited objects via API by passing IDs, PHIDs and monograms.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14600
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
Summary: Fixes T9869. This specific transaction endpoint was missing `shouldAllowPublic()`. Also modernize things a little.
Test Plan: Viewed a policy change by clicking the policy name from the transaction record on a public object while logged out.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9869
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14606
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: This makes document views a little more automatic, and a little more style to the page. The Document itself remains on a pure white centered background, but footer and preceeding objects go back to the original body color. This provides a bit more depth and separation over content and definitions/comments.
Test Plan:
Tested Phriction, Diviner, Legalpad, Phame, Email Commands, HTTP Commands, with and without a footer.
{F1005853}
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14582
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. This adds an automatic "Comments" field, like the Subscribers/Projects/Policy fields.
The primary goals here are:
- Allow users to make comments via Conduit.
- In the future, get stackable action support.
As a side effect, this also allows you to put comments on create forms. This is a little silly but seems fine, and may be relevant on edit forms (which I'm not 100% sure how I want to handle yet). I've just hidden them by default for now.
Test Plan:
{F976036}
{F976037}
{F976038}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14515
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: Fixes T9772. We now need an EditEngineConfiguration to do interesting things with EditEngine, but this public API wasn't properly making sure we have one.
Test Plan: Called `conduit.query` from web console. Fatal prior to patch; success afterward.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9772
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14475
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
