1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://we.phorge.it/source/phorge.git synced 2024-12-20 20:40:56 +01:00
Commit graph

296 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
epriestley
6fb3f857fb Stop the bleeding caused by attaching enormous patches to revision mail
Summary:
Ref T12033. This is a very narrow fix for this issue, but it should fix the major error: don't attach patches if they're bigger than the mail body limit (by default, 512KB).

Specifically, the logs from an install in T12033 show a 112MB patch being attached, and that's the biggest practical problem here.

I'll follow up on the tasks with more nuanced future work.

Test Plan: Enabled `differential.attach-patches`, saw a patch attached to email. Set the byte limit very low, saw patches get thrown away.

Reviewers: chad, amckinley

Reviewed By: amckinley

Maniphest Tasks: T12033

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18598
2017-09-13 15:32:55 -07:00
epriestley
9639ec0dfa Slightly simplify logic for determining if an inline comment has an effect
Summary: Minor cleanup, this logic can be simpler. Instead of special-casing inlines as having an effect if the have a comment, just consider any transaction with a comment to have an effect. I'm fairly certain this is always true.

Test Plan: Made inlines, tried to submit empty comments. Behavior unchanged.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18468
2017-08-24 15:26:32 -07:00
epriestley
48a74de0b6 Move all revision status transactions to modern values and mechanics
Summary:
Ref T2543. This updates and migrates the status change transactions:

  - All storage now records the modern modular transaction ("differential.revision.status"), not the obsolete non-modular transaction ("differential:status").
  - All storage now records the modern constants ("accepted"), not the obsolete numeric values ("2").

Test Plan:
  - Selected all the relevant rows before/after migration, data looked sane.
  - Browsed around, reviewed timelines, no changes after migration.
  - Changed revision states, saw appropriate new transactions in the database and timeline rendering.
  - Grepped for `differential:status`.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18419
2017-08-12 04:05:57 -07:00
epriestley
5348f34c9e Make all revision status readers explicitly read modern or legacy status
Summary: Ref T2543. All writers now write modern statuses. Make all readers explicit about whether they are reading modern or legacy statuses, so I can swap the storage format.

Test Plan:
  - Grepped for `getStatus()`, scanned the list. Other applications have methods with this name so it's possible I missed something.
  - Browed around, changed revision statuses.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18417
2017-08-11 17:22:22 -07:00
epriestley
7f743c14d5 Remove remaining ArcanistDifferentialRevisionStatus references in revision state logic
Summary: Ref T2543. This cleans up all the "when no one is rejecting/blocking and someone accepted, mark the revision overall as accepted" logic to use more modern status stuff instead of `ArcanistDifferentialRevisionStatus`.

Test Plan:
  - Updated revisions, saw them go to "Needs Review".
  - Accepted, requested changes to revisions.
  - Updated one with changes requested, saw it go to "needs review" again.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18413
2017-08-11 17:21:09 -07:00
epriestley
2b9838b482 Modularize remaining TYPE_ACTION transactions in Differential, reducing calls to ArcanistDifferentialRevisionStatus
Summary:
Ref T2543. This cleans up a couple of remaining rough edges:

  - We could do an older TYPE_ACTION "close" via the daemons.
  - We could do an older TYPE_ACTION "close" via `arc close-revision`, explicitly or implicitly in `arc land`, via API (`differential.close`).
  - We could do an older TYPE_ACTION "rethink" ("Plan Changes") via the API, via `arc diff --plan-changes` (`differential.createcomment`).

Move these to modern modular transactions, then get rid of all the validation and application logic for them. This nukes a bunch of `ArcanistDifferentialRevision::...` junk.

Test Plan:
  - Used `bin/repository reparse --message rXYZ...` to reparse a commit, closing a corresponding revision.
  - Used `differential.close` to close a revision.
  - Used `differential.createcomment` to plan changes to a revision.
  - Reviewed transaction log for full "closed by commit" message (linking to commit and mentioning author).
  - Grepped for `::TYPE_ACTION` to look for remaining callsites, didn't find any.
  - Grepped for `differential.close` and `differential.createcomment` in `arcanist/` to look for anything suspicious, seemed clean.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18412
2017-08-11 17:20:55 -07:00
epriestley
19bc91fd20 Modularize the Differential "status" transaction and move away from ArcanistDifferentialRevisionStatus
Summary:
Ref T2543. Converts the TYPE_STATUS transaction (used to render "This revision now requires changes to proceed.", "This revision is accepted and ready to land.", etc) to ModularTransactions.

Also, continue consolidating all the status-related information (here, more colors and icons) into a single place. By the end of this, we may learn that NEEDS_REVIEW uses //every// color.

Test Plan:
Reviewed old status transactions (unchanged) and created new ones (looked the same as the old ones).

(I plan to migrate all of these a few diffs from now, around when I change the storage format.)

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18410
2017-08-11 17:20:40 -07:00
epriestley
153e4d8a38 Remove old reviewer double writes to legacy edge table in Differential
Summary:
Ref T2543. Ref T10967. This isn't precisely related to "draft" status, but while I'm churning this stuff anyway, get rid of the old double writes to clean the code up a bit.

These were added in T10967 to make sure the migration was reversible/recoverable, but we haven't seen any issues with it in several months so I believe they can now be removed safely. Nothing has read this table since ~April.

Test Plan: Took various review actions on revisions (accept, reject, resign, comment, etc). If this change is correct, there should be no visible effect.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T10967, T2543

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18398
2017-08-11 13:38:52 -07:00
epriestley
b7c4f60e23 Only recognize "Fixes ..." in main revision content like the Summary or Test Plan
Summary:
Fixes T12642. Currently, writing "Fixes T..." in a comment gets picked up as a formal "fixes".

This is a bit confusing, and can also give you a "no effect" error if you "fixes ..." a task which is already "fixes"'d.

We could make the duplicate action a non-error, but just prevent the text from having an effect instead, which seems cleaner.

Test Plan:
  - Wrote "Fixes ..." in a summary, saw a "fixes" relationship established.
  - Wrote "Fixes ..." in a comment, got a "mention" instead.
  - `var_dump()`'d some stuff as a sanity check, looked reasonable.

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T12642

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17805
2017-04-30 13:12:28 -07:00
epriestley
af1d494d66 Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enough
Summary:
Previously, "reject" and "reject older" were separate statuses. Now, they're both shades of "reject".

Set the "older reject" flag properly when we find a non-current reject.

Test Plan:
  - User A accepts a revision.
  - User B rejects it.
  - Author updates it.
  - Before patch: incorrectly transitions to "accepted" ("older" reject is ignored).
  - After patch: correctly transitions to "needs review".

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17653
2017-04-11 09:54:34 -07:00
epriestley
f70ff34d97 Fix a copy/paste typo with sticky accept
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
2017-04-04 18:33:59 -07:00
epriestley
9ebb5f8cda Don't downgrade accepts on update (fix "sticky accept")
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
2017-04-03 09:55:22 -07:00
epriestley
2fbc9a52da Allow users to "Force accept" package reviews if they own a more general package
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
2017-03-28 11:51:40 -07:00
epriestley
ddc02ce420 When voiding "Accept" reviews, also void "Reject" reviews
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
2017-03-28 11:51:06 -07:00
epriestley
415ad78484 Remove old code for "Request Review" action from Differential
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
2017-03-28 11:50:40 -07:00
epriestley
aea46e55da Fix an issue where "Request Review" of a fully-accepted revision would transition to "Accepted"
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
2017-03-28 11:50:15 -07:00
epriestley
0ceab7d36f Rename "getReviewerStatus()" to "getReviewers()"
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
2017-03-20 17:11:40 -07:00
epriestley
a15df4f8d5 Rename "needReviewerStatus()" into "needReviewers()"
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
2017-03-20 16:46:16 -07:00
epriestley
794b456530 Store "last comment" and "last action" diffs on reviewers
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
2017-03-20 16:44:05 -07:00
epriestley
77b3efafbd Use ModularTransactions for accept/reject/resign in "differential.createcomment"
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
2017-03-20 16:43:43 -07:00
epriestley
a9cbbf3e5e Apply Owners reviewers using ModularTransactions
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
2017-03-20 16:43:17 -07:00
epriestley
e684794bf3 Get "Create Revision" out of Quick Create menu for now
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
2017-01-13 09:00:44 -08:00
epriestley
00e2755eab Provide tailored strings for revision creation
Summary: See D17169. Ref T11114.

Test Plan: {F2333825}

Reviewers: chad

Reviewed By: chad

Maniphest Tasks: T11114

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17170
2017-01-10 12:45:36 -08:00
epriestley
1f2306999b Fix a case where "Accept + Comment" would ignore the "Accept"
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
2017-01-05 11:30:20 -08:00
epriestley
69194fdaf5 Make marking comments as "Done" work cleanly on EditEngine
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
2016-12-31 10:12:01 -08:00
epriestley
b373dcef74 Restore some minor state behaviors to Differential on EditEngine
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
2016-12-31 10:11:28 -08:00
epriestley
18249b097f Make inline comment preview and submission mostly work on EditEngine
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
2016-12-31 10:10:29 -08:00
epriestley
f7b5955d33 Order actions sensibly within Differential revision comment action groups
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
2016-12-31 10:10:05 -08:00
epriestley
48fcfeadaf Allow comment actions to be grouped; group Differential "Review" and "Revision" actions
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
2016-12-31 10:09:41 -08:00
epriestley
5a6643f36f Restore "Accept", "Reject" and "Resign" actions to Differential on EditEngine
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
2016-12-31 10:09:27 -08:00
epriestley
3c5a17ba8a Restore "Reclaim" and "Abandon" actions to Differential on EditEngine
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
2016-12-31 10:06:46 -08:00
epriestley
c05306d746 Move Differential to EditEngine comments
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
2016-12-31 10:06:15 -08:00
epriestley
60f41b87e9 Simplify "Tasks" field in Differential
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
2016-12-16 10:26:34 -08:00
epriestley
64509dcca7 Drive CLI-based revision edits through "differential.revision.edit" API + EditEngine
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
2016-12-16 10:08:49 -08:00
epriestley
102ea3cfa4 Replace Differential Edit controller with EditEngine-driven EditPro controller
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
2016-12-14 07:27:39 -08:00
epriestley
32ce21a181 Allow the new Differential EditEngine form to create/update diffs for revisions
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
2016-12-14 07:27:25 -08:00
epriestley
7f99f2cde8 Add EditEngine + Modular Transactions for reviewers
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
2016-12-13 18:20:58 -08:00
epriestley
6c9af81f7a Support "Test Plan" with modular transactions and EditEngine
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
2016-12-13 18:20:16 -08:00
epriestley
5349d6bd5c Add Summary and Repository EditEngine fields + Modular Transactions to Differential
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
2016-12-13 18:18:32 -08:00
epriestley
0906bf547b Begin adding "pro" modular transaction fields to Differential
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
2016-12-13 14:50:31 -08:00
epriestley
eda64b8549 Add a very basic EditPro controller for Differential
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
2016-12-13 14:36:06 -08:00
epriestley
77fa1ea738 Rename "DifferentialReviewer" to "DifferentialReviewerProxy"
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
2016-12-13 14:35:35 -08:00
epriestley
dad17fb98a Make "metamta.differential.inline-patches" imply a reasonable byte limit, not just a line limit
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
2016-10-17 15:56:21 -07:00
epriestley
7f6fa28363 When loading packages affected by a change to a particular path, ignore archived packages
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
2016-09-16 14:02:53 -07:00
epriestley
15021a0bcc Fix bad array index test in Differential package code
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
2016-08-14 13:10:32 -07:00
Aviv Eyal
de6349dd67 Revision substate CLOSED_FROM_ACCEPTED
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
2016-06-27 20:29:47 +00:00
epriestley
65634781b4 Don't re-mention users for comment edits
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
2016-06-13 13:57:59 -07:00
Chad Little
5bb3cbe239 Add a "View Revision" button to HTML email
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
2016-05-18 14:25:16 -07:00
epriestley
809c7bf996 Allow users to manage package dominion rules
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
2016-05-17 10:57:43 -07:00
epriestley
c9365e48d8 Don't trigger "Auto Review" if the author is already an owner; document "Auto Review"
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
2016-05-13 17:24:33 -07:00