Summary: Ref T3092. Same deal as D6771, but for branches rather than projects.
Test Plan: {F54855}
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6775
Summary:
^\s+(['"])dust\1\s*=>\s*true,?\s*$\n
Test Plan: Looked through the diff.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6769
Summary: Ref T3092. Fixes T3724. Use modern/flexible UI for these interfaces. Removes the ability to retarget an existing branch (you can just close it and open a new one if you made a mistake).
Test Plan: {F54437} {F54438}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092, T3724
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6765
Summary:
Releeph branch lists in project views have a bunch of custom UI right now; give them more standard UI and ApplicationSearch.
This drops a small piece of functionality: we now show only a total open request count instead of a detailed enumeration of each request status. I assume this is reasonable (that is, the important piece is "is there something to do on this branch?"), but we can muck with it if the more detailed status is important.
Test Plan: {F54344}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3656
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6764
Summary:
Ref T3721. Releeph currently attempts to implement a flexible, field-driven search for branches, but it's building all of its own infrastructure and it ends up heading down some weird paths. In particular, it loads **every** request and then makes calls into fields to filter them. It also tries to be very very general, which isn't really necessary (for example, I think it's reasonable for us to assume that we won't let you disable the "requestor" field).
ApplicationSearch and CustomField provide more scalable approaches to this problem; move search on top of them. The query still ends up doing some filtering in-process, but it's now far more limited in scope and can be denormalized later.
Test Plan: {F54304}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3721
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6758
Summary: Fixes T3548. Concrete Releeph controllers currently extend either from ReleephController or PhabricatorController directly. Instead, make them all extend ReleephController. Introduce ReleephProjectController for controllers which depend on project context. Project context code which lived in ReleephController moves to ReleephProjectController.
Test Plan: Viewed list, project, releases, requests.
Reviewers: btrahan, edward
Reviewed By: edward
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3548
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6472
Summary:
This diff covers a bit of ground.
- PHUIDocumentExample has been added
- PHUIDocument has been extended with new features
- PhabricatorMenuView is now PHUIListView
- PhabricatorMenuItemView is now PHUIItemListView
Overall - I think I've gotten all the edges covered here. There is some derpi-ness that we can talk about, comments in the code. Responsive design is missing from the new features on PHUIDocument, will follow up later.
Test Plan: Tested mobile and desktop menus, old phriction layout, new document views, new lists, and object lists.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6130
Summary: Ref T2784. This one was a wee bit complicated. Had to add PhabricatorUser and concept of initFromConduit (or not) to DiffusionRequest.
Test Plan: foreach repo, visited CALLSIGN and clicked a commit and verified they laoded correctly. Hacked code to hit NOT via Conduit and repeated tests to great success.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: chad, aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T2784
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5928
Summary: Went and pht'd most everything I could find, except exceptions. Fixes T3091
Test Plan: Bopped around the application, didn't seem to break anything but didn't test all flows. Should be safe.
Reviewers: epriestley, edward
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3091
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5825
