The root issue here is actually just that I cherry-picked stable locally
but did not push it. However, this is a minor issue I also caught while
double-checking things.
Auditors: chad
Summary:
Fixes T12496. Sticky accept was accidentally impacted by the "void" changes in D17566.
Instead, don't always downgrade all accepts/rejects: on update, we only want to downgrade accepts.
Test Plan:
- With sticky accept off, updated an accepted revision: new state is "needs review".
- With sticky accept on, updated an accepted revision: new state is "accepted" (sticky accept working correctly).
- Did "reject" + "request review" to make sure that still works, worked fine.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12496
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17605
Summary:
Ref T12272. If you own a package which owns "/", this allows you to force-accept package reviews for packages which own sub-paths, like "/src/adventure/".
The default UI looks something like this:
```
[X] Accept as epriestley
[X] Accept as Root Package
[ ] Force accept as Adventure Package
```
By default, force-accepts are not selected.
(I may do some UI cleanup and/or annotate "because you own X" in the future and/or mark these accepts specially in some way, particularly if this proves confusing along whatever dimension.)
Test Plan: {F4314747}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12272
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17569
Summary: Ref T10967. This change is similar to D17566, but for rejects.
Test Plan:
- Create a revision as A, with reviewer B.
- Reject as B.
- Request review as A.
- Before patch: stuck in "rejected".
- After patch: transitions back to "needs review".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17568
Summary: Ref T10967. This moves all remaining "request review" pathways (just `differential.createcomment`) to the new code, and removes the old action.
Test Plan: Requested review on a revision, `grep`'d for the action constant.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17567
Summary:
Ref T10967. This is explained in more detail in T10967#217125
When an author does "Request Review" on an accepted revision, void (in the sense of "cancel out", like a bank check) any "accepted" reviewers on the current diff.
Test Plan:
- Create a revision with author A and reviewer B.
- Accept as B.
- "Request Review" as A.
- (With sticky accepts enabled.)
- Before patch: revision swithced back to "accepted".
- After patch: the earlier review is "voided" by te "Request Review", and the revision switches to "Review Requested".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17566
Summary:
Ref T10967. Improves some method names:
- `Revision->getReviewerStatus()` -> `Revision->getReviewers()`
- `Revision->attachReviewerStatus()` -> `Revision->attachReviewers()`
- `Reviewer->getStatus()` -> `Reviewer->getReviewerStatus()` (this is mostly to make this more greppable)
Test Plan:
- bunch o' `grep`
- Browsed around.
- If I missed anything, it should fatal in an obvious way. We have a lot of other `getStatus()` calls and it's hard to be sure I got them all.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17522
Summary: Ref T10967. The old name was because we had a `getReviewers()` tied to `needRelationships()`, rename this method to use a simpler and more clear name.
Test Plan: `grep`, browsed around.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17519
Summary:
Ref T10967. We have a "commented" state to help reviewers get a better sense of who is part of a discussion, and a "last action" state to help distinguish between "accept" and "accepted an older version", for the purposes of sticky accepts and as a UI hint.
Currently, these are first-class states, partly beacuse we were somewhat limited in what we could do with edges. However, a more flexible way to represent them is as flags separate from the primary state flag.
In the new storage, write them as separate state information: `lastActionDiffPHID` stores the Diff PHID of the last review action (accept, reject, etc). `lastCommentDiffPHID` stores the Diff PHID of the last comment (top-level or inline).
Test Plan: Applied storage changes, commented and acted on a revision. Saw appropriate state reflected in the database.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17514
Summary:
Ref T10967. `differential.createcomment` is a frozen API method which has been obsoleted by `differential.revision.edit`.
It is the only remaining way to apply an "accept", "reject", or "resign" action using the old "ACTION" code.
Instead of using the old code, sneakly apply a new type of transaction in these cases instead.
Then, remove all the remaining old code for this stuff on the write pathways.
Test Plan:
- Used "differential.createcomment" to accept, reject, and resign from a revision.
- Grepped for all removed ACTION_X constants, found them only in rendering code.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17513
Summary: Ref T10967. See that task for some discussion. This lets us do double writes on this pathway.
Test Plan: Set an Owners package to auto-review. Created revisions which triggered it: one with no reviewers (autoreview added); one with the package as a blocking reviewer explicitly (no automatic stuff happened, as expected).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17512
Summary:
Ref T12098.
We have two methods (`supportsEditEngineConfiguration()` and `isEngineConfigurable()`) which sort of do the same thing and probably should be merged.
For now, just swap which one we override to get "Create Revision" out of the Quick Create menu.
Test Plan: No more "Create Revision" in Quick Create menu.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12098
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17204
Summary:
Ref T11114. When you comment, we try to upgrade your review status to "commented".
This can conflict with upgrading it to "accepted" or "rejected", or removing it entirely.
For now, just avoid making this update. After T10967, I expect "you commented" to be orthogonal to accepted/rejected so it should stop conflicting on its own.
Test Plan:
- As an "added" reviewer, accepted a revision with a comment in the same transaction.
- Before patch: accept didn't stick.
- After patch: accept sticks.
This may be somewhat magical/order-dependent but I was able to reproduce it locally.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17146
Summary: Ref T11114. Fixes T10323.
Test Plan:
- Marked comments as done only: no warning about not leaving a comment.
- Did nothing: warning about posting an empty comment.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114, T10323
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17120
Summary:
Ref T11114. This restores:
- Commandeering should exeucte Herald.
- Commandeering should swap reviewers.
- "Request Review" on an "Accepted" revision should downgrade reviewers so they have to accept again.
Test Plan:
- Commandeered, saw Herald run and reviewers swap.
- Requested review of an accepted revision, saw it drop down to "Needs Review" with "Accepted Prior" on the reviewer.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17118
Summary: Ref T11114. This comments nearly working on EditEngine. Only significant issue I caught is that the "View" link doesn't render properly because it depends on JS which is tricky to hook up. I'll clean that up in a future diff.
Test Plan: {F2279201}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17116
Summary:
Ref T11114. See D17114 for some discussion.
For review actions: accept, reject, resign.
For revision actions, order is basically least-severe to most-severe action pairs: plan changes, request review, close, reopen, abandon, reclaim, commandeer.
Test Plan: Viewed revisions as an author and a reviewer, saw sensible action order within action groups.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17115
Summary:
Ref T11114. Differential has more actions than it once did, and may have further actions in the future.
Make this dropdown a little easier to parse by grouping similar types of actions, like "Accept" and "Reject".
(The action order still needs to be tweaked a bit.)
Test Plan: {F2274526}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: eadler
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17114
Summary:
Ref T11114. Some rough edges, but this largely makes Accept, Reject and Resign work in the new EditEngine comment area.
Ref T11050. This lays a little bit of groundwork for having "resign" mean "I don't want to review this, even if projects or packages I'm a member of need to", not just "remove me personally as a user reviewer".
Test Plan: Accepted, rejected and resigned from revisions without any major state issues.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114, T11050
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17113
Summary: Ref T11114. This begins restoring comment actions to Differential, but on top of EditEngine.
Test Plan: {F2263148}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17107
Summary:
Ref T11114. This is a transitional change that breaks a bunch of stuff. I'll hold it until I've restored features.
This stuff works:
- Commenting.
- Subscribers/tags/reviewers.
- Pinning.
- Drafts.
This stuff does not work yet:
- Preview of inline comments.
- Probably submitting inlines, whatsoever.
- Comment-area warnings like "There are failing tests."
- All meaningful actions (accept, reject, etc).
Test Plan: Commented on a revision. Essentially nothing else works yet.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17106
Summary:
Ref T11114. Keep UI, throw everything else away.
Includes an imperfect-but-not-too-awful fix to keep the field actually working.
Test Plan: Edited tasks from CLI.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17088
Summary:
Ref T11114. This creates `differential.revision.edit` (a modern, v3 API method) and redefines the existing methods in terms of it.
Both `differential.createrevision` and `differential.updaterevision` are now internally implemented by building a `differential.revision.edit` API call and then executing it.
I //think// this covers everything except custom fields, which need some tweaking to work with EditEngine. I'll clean that up in the next change.
Test Plan:
- Created, updated, and edited revisions via `arc`.
- Called APIs manually via test console.
- Stored custom fields ("Blame Rev", "Revert Plan") aren't exposed yet.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17067
Summary:
Ref T11114. This replaces the old edit controller with a new one based entirely on EditEngine.
This removes the CustomFieldEditEngineExtension hack for Differential, since remaining field types are fairly straightforward and work with existing EditEngine support, as far as I can tell.
Test Plan:
- Created a revision via web diffs.
- Updated a revision via web diffs.
- Edited a revision via web.
- Edited nonstandard custom fields ("Blame Revision", "JIRA Issues").
- Created a revision via CLI.
- Updated a revision via CLI.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17054
Summary: Ref T11114. Much of this is around making the "comment-while-updating" flow work correctly.
Test Plan:
- Created new diffs by copy/pasting, then:
- used one to create a new revision;
- used one to update an existing revision, with a comment.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17053
Summary: Ref T11114. This one is a bit more complex, but I think I covered everything.
Test Plan:
- Added reviewers.
- Removed reviewers.
- Made reviewers blocking.
- Made reviewers nonblocking.
- Tried to make the author a reviewer.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17050
Summary: Ref T11114. The only real trick here is that we respect configuration in `differential.fields`.
Test Plan: Turned plan on and off, tried to remove the plan, edited the plan.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17048
Summary: Ref T11114. These are unambiguous and always-enabled.
Test Plan: {F2117777}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17047
Summary:
Ref T11114. Currently, all of Differential is extremely custom CustomFields. I want to back away from that somewhat and leverage more EditEngine / ModularTransactions infrastructure.
This allows EditEngine, ModularTransactions, and CustomFields to coexist in an uneasy peace. The "EditPro" controller applies a //different edit// than the CustomFields do, but everything works out in the end. I think.
Hopefully the horrible mess I am creating here will be short-lived.
Test Plan:
- Edited a revision with the normal editor.
- Edited a revision with the pro editor.
- Created a revision with `arc diff`.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17044
Summary: Ref T11114. This doesn't really support anything yet, but technically works if you manually go to `/editpro/`.
Test Plan: {F2117302}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11114
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17043
Summary: Ref T10967. This makes room for a `DifferentialReviewer` object which can be a real storage table.
Test Plan: Grepped for `DifferentialReviewer`, browsed Differential.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10967
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17041
Summary:
Fixes T11748. This option currently implies a line limit (e.g., inline patches that are less than 100 lines long). This breaks down if a diff has a 10MB line, like a huge blob of JSON all on one line.
For now, imply a reasonable byte limit (256 bytes per line).
See T11767 for future work to make this and related options more cohesive.
Test Plan:
- With option at `1000`: sent Differential email, saw patches inlined.
- With option at `10`: sent Differential email, saw patches dropped because of the byte limit.
- `var_dump()`'d the actual limits and used `bin/worker execute --id ...` to sanity check that things were working properly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11748
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16714
Summary:
Ref T11650. Currently, we load packages and then discard the archived ones.
However, this gets "dominion" rules (where a more-general package gives up ownership if a more-specific package exists) wrong if the more-specific package is archived: we incorrectly give up ownership.
Instead, just ignore these packages completely when loading affected packages. This is slightly simpler.
(There are technically two pieces of code we have to do this for, which should be a single piece of code but which haven't yet been unified.)
Test Plan:
- Created packages:
- Package A, on "/" (strong dominion, autoreview).
- Package B, on "/x/" (weak dominion, autoreview).
- Package C, on "/x/y" (archived, autoreview).
- Create a revision affecting "/x/y".
- Saw correct path ownership in table of contents ("B", strongest package only).
- Saw correct autoreview behavior (A + B).
- (Prior to patch, in `master`, reproduced the problem behaviors described in T11650, with bad dominion rules and failure to autoreview B.)
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11650
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16564
Summary: This needs an `isset()` for cases when authority and packages don't completely overlap.
Test Plan:
- With a package set to trigger autoreview, created a revision.
- Observed error log, saw no more error.
- Saw package trigger autoreview properly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16398
Summary:
Ref T9838.
Add a Properties field to Revision, and update a `wasAcceptedBeforeClose` when closing a revision.
Test Plan:
A quick run through the obvious steps (Close with commit/manually, with or w/o accept) and calling `differential.query` shows the `wasAcceptedBeforeClose` property was setup correctly.
Pushing closed + accepted passes the relevant herald, which was my immediate issue; Pushing un-accepted is blocked.
Test the "commit" rule (Different from "pre-commit") by hacking the DB and running the "has accepted revision" rule in a test-console.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T9838
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15085
Summary:
Ref T11035. This only fixes half of the issue: comment editing has been fixed, but normal transactions which edit things like descriptions haven't yet.
The normal edits aren't fixed because the "oldValues" are populated too late. The code should start working once they get populated sooner, but I don't want to jump the gun on that since it'll probably have some spooky effects. I have some other transaction changes coming down the pipe which should provide a better context for testing "oldValue" population order.
Test Plan:
- Mentioned `@dog` in a comment.
- Removed `@dog` as a subscriber.
- Edited the comment, adding some unrelated text at the end (e.g., fixing a typo).
- Before change: `@dog` re-added as subscriber.
- After change: no re-add.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T11035
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D16108
Summary:
Ref T10694. If this feels good, I'd plan to eventually add something similar to other applications ("View Task", etc).
Not sure if we should keep the object link later in the mail body or not. I left it for now.
Test Plan: {F1307256, size=full}
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T10694
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15884
Summary: Ref T10939. This adds UI, transactions, etc, to adjust dominion rules.
Test Plan:
- Read documentation.
- Changed dominion rules.
- Created packages on `/` ("A") and `/x` ("B") with "Auto Review: Review".
- Touched `/x`.
- Verified that A and B were added with strong dominion.
- Verified that only B was added when A was set to weak dominion.
- Viewed file in Diffusion, saw correct ownership with strong/weak dominion rules.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10939
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15936
Summary:
Ref T10939. If you already own a package, don't trigger the subscribe/review rules.
Document how these rules work.
Test Plan:
- Read documentation.
- Removed reviewers, updated a revision, got autoreviewed.
- Joined package.
- Removed reveiwers, updated a revision, no more autoreview.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10939
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15918
Summary:
Ref T10939. Fixes T8887. This enables and implements the "review" and "blocking review" options for packages.
This is a bit copy-pastey from `DifferentialReviewersHeraldAction`, which doesn't feel awesome. I think the right fix is Glorious Infrasturcture, though -- I filed T10967 to track that.
Test Plan:
- Set package autoreveiw to "Review".
- Updated, got a reveiwer.
- Set autoreview to "blocking".
- Updated, got a blocking reviewer.
{F1311720}
{F1311721}
{F1311722}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8887, T10939
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15916
Summary:
Ref T10939. Ref T8887. This moves toward letting packages automatically become reviewers or blocking reviewers of owned code.
This change adds an "Auto Review" option to packages. Because adding reviewers/blocking reviewers is a little tricky, it doesn't actually have these options yet -- just a "subscribe" option. I'll do the reviewer work in the next update.
Test Plan:
Created a revision in a package with "Auto Review: Subscribe to Changes". The package got subscribed.
{F1311677}
{F1311678}
{F1311679}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8887, T10939
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15915
Summary: Fixes T9790. This uses a simple renderer, like the inline context renderer, that emphasizes getting a quick glance at small changes and working reasonably on mobile devices.
Test Plan:
- Set `inline` setting to `9999`.
- Created a diff.
- Saw it render reasonably in HTML mail.
- Also tested text mail to make sure I didn't break that.
{F1310137, size=full}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9790
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15901
Summary:
Ref T10694.
- Shift margins/padding around so inlines with multiple paragraphs get reasonable spacing.
- Add `text-decoration: none` to the "View Inline" link to kill the underline.
Test Plan: {F1265342}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10694
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15863
Summary:
Ref T10694. Ref T9790. When generating inline diff context, highlight it and then mangle the highlighted output into `style="..."` so it works in HTML.
Also try to tighten up some spacing/formatting stuff.
Test Plan:
Got some output in this vein:
{F1259937}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9790, T10694
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15852
Summary:
Ref T10694. This is still missing some pieces, but seems to get most of the data into the mail in a plausible format:
- When an inline remarks on code, show the patch inline in the mail body.
- When an inline replies to another inline, show that other inline in the mail body.
- Apply remarkup rendering to inline content.
- Apply basic styling to mail body blocks.
Not covered yet:
- Syntax highlighting.
- Diff highlighting.
- Maybe clearer style/layout hints to connect comments to what they reply to? Current approach might get messy with inlines that have blockquotes and code blocks inside them, for example.
- I probably want to cap the amount of diff context we ever show to ~7 lines, even if you drag over 200 lines of code.
- CSS is a generally a bit rough still.
- The `unified-comment-context` option is effectively always on now, and should be removed.
- Text section is getting indented right now but probably shouldn't be.
- Spacing, etc., might be a bit off.
Test Plan:
Rigged Home to render these things, got a plausible-looking render (top is text, bottom is HTML):
{F1259052}
Sent myself some inline comment mail, got a plausible result.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10694
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15850
Summary:
Ref T9845. In Differential, this is not a remarkup block -- it's a mail section. `addTextSection()` has special magic behavior when handed a prebuilt section since D9375.
Swapping to `addRemarkupSection()` causes the error in T9845 and renders nothing in the comment section.
Even if it were a block of text, it would not be appropriate to add it as remarkup. This would incorrectly render comments in files like `__init__.py`, which are common on Python (the filename would render as "__init__.py"). Okay that's a bad example since it works fine but, uh, a file named `T123` would be no good or whatever.
I'll realign T9845 to clean this up and fix it more durably.
Test Plan: Sent myself some mail with inline comments, saw them in the mail.
Reviewers: joshuaspence, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9845
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14589
Summary: Ref T992. I noticed that `ManiphestTask` mail doesn't render Remarkup properly (instead, it renders Remarkup literally). I //think// this is because the code calls `addTextSection()` rather than `addRemarkupSection()`.
Test Plan: Created a new Maniphest Task and saw Remarkup in the generated self-email (inspect the email contents with `./bin/mail show-outbound`). I didn't test the other affected applications.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T992
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14511
Summary:
Ref T9787. To fix this, I want to change how file PHIDs are extracted slightly: specifically, I'm going to extract them later in the editing process.
Before doing this, clean up a couple of bad implementations:
- Owners extracts its description as a file PHID. This is an error.
- Extract the description as a remarkup block instead.
- Add an edge table so stuff like file attachment works properly.
- Differential has a no-op extract method. This is presumably just a copy/paste issue from long ago.
Test Plan:
- Edited a revision in Differential.
- Dropped a file into the description of an Owners package.
- Before change: this did not attach the file.
- After change: the file now attaches properly and shows up as "Attached" in the file details.
Reviewers: chad, joshuaspence
Reviewed By: joshuaspence
Subscribers: joshuaspence
Maniphest Tasks: T9787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14493
