Summary:
Depends on D18947. Ref T13051. This goes through transaction tables and compacts the edge storage into the slim format.
I put this on `bin/garbage` instead of `bin/storage` because `bin/storage` has a lot of weird stuff about how it manages databases so that it can run before configuration (e.g., all the `--user`, `--password` type flags for configuring DB connections).
Test Plan:
Loaded an object with a bunch of transactions. Ran migration. Spot checked table for sanity. Loaded another copy of the object in the web UI, compared the two pages, saw no user-visible changes.
Here's a concrete example of the migration effect -- old row:
```
*************************** 44. row ***************************
id: 757
phid: PHID-XACT-PSTE-5gnaaway2vnyen5
authorPHID: PHID-USER-cvfydnwadpdj7vdon36z
objectPHID: PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7
viewPolicy: public
editPolicy: PHID-USER-cvfydnwadpdj7vdon36z
commentPHID: NULL
commentVersion: 0
transactionType: core:edge
oldValue: {"PHID-PROJ-wh32nih7q5scvc5lvipv":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-wh32nih7q5scvc5lvipv","dateCreated":"1449170691","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-5r2ed5v27xrgltvou5or":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-5r2ed5v27xrgltvou5or","dateCreated":"1449170683","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-zfp44q7loir643b5i4v4":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-zfp44q7loir643b5i4v4","dateCreated":"1449170668","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-okljqs7prifhajtvia3t":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-okljqs7prifhajtvia3t","dateCreated":"1448902756","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-3cuwfuuh4pwqyuof2hhr":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-3cuwfuuh4pwqyuof2hhr","dateCreated":"1448899367","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-amvkc5zw2gsy7tyvocug":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-amvkc5zw2gsy7tyvocug","dateCreated":"1448833330","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]}}
newValue: {"PHID-PROJ-wh32nih7q5scvc5lvipv":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-wh32nih7q5scvc5lvipv","dateCreated":"1449170691","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-5r2ed5v27xrgltvou5or":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-5r2ed5v27xrgltvou5or","dateCreated":"1449170683","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-zfp44q7loir643b5i4v4":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-zfp44q7loir643b5i4v4","dateCreated":"1449170668","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-okljqs7prifhajtvia3t":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-okljqs7prifhajtvia3t","dateCreated":"1448902756","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-3cuwfuuh4pwqyuof2hhr":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-3cuwfuuh4pwqyuof2hhr","dateCreated":"1448899367","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-amvkc5zw2gsy7tyvocug":{"src":"PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7","type":"41","dst":"PHID-PROJ-amvkc5zw2gsy7tyvocug","dateCreated":"1448833330","seq":"0","dataID":null,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-tbowhnwinujwhb346q36":{"dst":"PHID-PROJ-tbowhnwinujwhb346q36","type":41,"data":[]},"PHID-PROJ-izrto7uflimduo6uw2tp":{"dst":"PHID-PROJ-izrto7uflimduo6uw2tp","type":41,"data":[]}}
contentSource: {"source":"web","params":[]}
metadata: {"edge:type":41}
dateCreated: 1450197571
dateModified: 1450197571
```
New row:
```
*************************** 44. row ***************************
id: 757
phid: PHID-XACT-PSTE-5gnaaway2vnyen5
authorPHID: PHID-USER-cvfydnwadpdj7vdon36z
objectPHID: PHID-PSTE-5uj6oqv4kmhtr6ctwcq7
viewPolicy: public
editPolicy: PHID-USER-cvfydnwadpdj7vdon36z
commentPHID: NULL
commentVersion: 0
transactionType: core:edge
oldValue: []
newValue: ["PHID-PROJ-tbowhnwinujwhb346q36","PHID-PROJ-izrto7uflimduo6uw2tp"]
contentSource: {"source":"web","params":[]}
metadata: {"edge:type":41}
dateCreated: 1450197571
dateModified: 1450197571
```
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13051
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18948
Summary:
Ref T13051. This puts a translation layer between the raw edge data in the transaction table and the UI that uses it.
The intent is to start writing new, more compact data soon. This class give us a consistent API for interacting with either the new or old data format, so we don't have to migrate everything upfront.
Test Plan: Browsed around, saw existing edge transactions render properly in transactions and feed. Added and removed subscribers and projects, saw good transaction rendering.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13051
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18946
Summary: See PHI280. We have a similar field for tasks already, this is generally a reasonable sort of thing to support, and the addition of "draft" states means there are some pretty reasonable use cases.
Test Plan:
- Wrote a status-based ("status is needs revision") Herald rule.
- Tested it against a "Needs Revision" revision (passed) and a "Changes Planned" revision (failed).
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18938
Summary:
Depends on D18918. Ref T13046. Ref T5954. Pull logs can currently be browsed in the web UI, but this isn't very powerful, especially if you have thousands of them.
Allow SearchEngine implementations to define exportable fields so that users can "Use Results > Export Data" on any query. In particular, they can use this workflow to download a file with pull logs.
In the future, this can replace the existing "Export to Excel" feature in Maniphest.
For now, we hard-code JSON as the only supported datatype and don't actually make any effort to format the data properly, but this leaves room to add more exporters (CSV, Excel) and data type awareness (integer casting, date formatting, etc) in the future.
For sufficiently large result sets, this will probably time out. At some point, I'll make this use the job queue (like bulk editing) when the export is "large" (affects more than 1K rows?).
Test Plan: Downloaded pull logs in JSON format.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13046, T5954
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18919
Summary:
Depends on D18931. Ref T13048. Ref T13041. This field means "the first accepting reviewer, where order is mostly arbitrary". Modern rules should almost certainly use "Accepting Reviewers" instead.
Getting rid of this completely is a pain, but we can at least reduce confusion by marking it as not-the-new-hotness. Add a "Deprecated" group, move it there, and mark it for exile.
Test Plan:
Edited a commit rule, saw it in "Deprecated" group at the bottom of the list:
{F5395001}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13048, T13041
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18932
Summary:
Depends on D18925. Ref T13048. Currently, HeraldRule stores policies as integers (0 or 1) in the database.
The application tries to mostly use strings ("first", "every"), but doesn't do a good job of hiding the fact that the values are integers deeper in the stack. So we end up with a lot of code like this:
```lang=php
$stored_int_value = $rule->getRepetitionPolicy();
$equivalent_string = HeraldRepetitionPolicyConfig::getString($stored_int_value);
$is_first = ($equivalent_string === HeraldRepetitionPolicyConfig::FIRST);
```
This happens in several places and is generally awful. Replace it with:
```lang=php
$is_first = $rule->isRepeatFirst();
```
To do this, merge `HeraldRepetitionPolicyConfig` into `HeraldRule` and hide all the mess inside the methods.
(This may let us just get rid of the integers in a later change, although I'm not sure I want to commit to that.)
Test Plan:
- Grepped for `HeraldRepetitionPolicyConfig`, no more hits.
- Grepped for `setRepetitionPolicy(...)` and `getRepetitionPolicy(...)`. There are no remaining callers outside of `HeraldRule`.
- Browed and edited several rules. I'll vet this more convincingly after adding the new repetition rule.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13048
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18926
Summary: Depends on D18928. Ref T13043. Add some automated test coverage for SSH revocation rules.
Test Plan: Ran tests, got a clean bill of health.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18929
Summary:
Depends on D18912. Ref T13046. Add a UI to browse the existing pull log table.
The actual log still has some significant flaws, but get the basics working.
Test Plan: {F5391909}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13046
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18914
Summary:
See PHI305. Ref T13046.
The SSH workflows currently extend `PhabricatorManagementWorkflow` to benefit from sharing all the standard argument parsing code. Sharing the parsing code is good, but it also means they inherit a `getViewer()` method which returns the ommnipotent viewer.
This is appropriate for everything else which extends `ManagementWorkflow` (like `bin/storage`, `bin/auth`, etc.) but not appropriate for SSH workflows, which have a real user.
This caused a bug with the pull logs where `pullerPHID` was not recorded properly. We used `$this->getViewer()->getPHID()` but the correct code was `$this->getUser()->getPHID()`.
To harden this against future mistakes:
- Don't extend `ManagementWorkflow`. Extend `PhutilArgumentWorkflow` instead. We **only** want the argument parsing code.
- Rename `get/setUser()` to `get/setSSHUser()` to make them explicit.
Then, fix the pull log bug by calling `getSSHUser()` instead of `getViewer()`.
Test Plan:
- Pulled and pushed to a repository over SSH.
- Grepped all the SSH stuff for the altered symbols.
- Saw pulls record a valid `pullerPHID` in the pull log.
- Used `echo {} | ssh ... conduit conduit.ping` to test conduit over SSH.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13046
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18912
Summary:
Depends on D18904. Ref T13043. If an attacker compromises a victim's session and bypasses their MFA, they can try to guess the user's current account password by making repeated requests to change it: if they guess the right "Old Password", they get a different error than if they don't.
I don't think this is really a very serious concern (the attacker already got a session and MFA, if configured, somehow; many installs don't use passwords anyway) but we get occasional reports about it from HackerOne. Technically, it's better policy to rate limit it, and this should reduce the reports we receive.
Test Plan: Tried to change password over and over again, eventually got rated limited. Used `bin/auth unlimit` to clear the limit, changed password normally without issues.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18906
Summary:
Ref T13043. We have ~4 copies of this logic (registration, lost password recovery, set password, set VCS password).
Currently it varies a bit from case to case, but since it's all going to be basically identical once account passwords swap to the new infrastructure, bring it into the Engine so it can live in one place.
This also fixes VCS passwords not being affected by `account.minimum-password-length`.
Test Plan: Hit all errors in "VCS Password" panel. Successfully changed password.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18902
Summary:
Ref T13043. In D18898 I moved VCS passwords to the new shared infrastructure.
Before account passwords can move, we need to make two changes:
- For legacy reasons, VCS passwords and Account passwords have different "digest" algorithms. Both are more complicated than they should be, but we can't easily fix it without breaking existing passwords. Add a `PasswordHashInterface` so that objects which can have passwords hashes can implement custom digest logic for each password type.
- Account passwords have a dedicated external salt (`PhabricatorUser->passwordSalt`). This is a generally reasonable thing to support (since not all hashers are self-salting) and we need to keep it around so existing passwords still work. Add salt support to `AuthPassword` and make it generate/regenerate when passwords are updated.
Then add a nice story about password digestion.
Test Plan: Ran migrations. Used an existing VCS password; changed VCS password. Tried to use a revoked password. Unit tests still pass. Grepped for callers to legacy `PhabricatorHash::digestPassword()`, found none.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18900
Summary:
Ref T13043. After D18898, this has been migrated to new, more modern storage and no longer has any readers or writers.
One migration from long ago (early 2014) is affected. Since this is ancient and the cost of dropping this is small (see inline), I just dropped it.
I'll note this in the changelog.
Test Plan: Ran migrations, got a clean bill of health from `storage status`. Grepped for removed symbol.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18899
Summary:
Ref T13043. When we verify a password and a better hasher is available, we automatically upgrade the stored hash to the stronger hasher.
Add test coverage for this workflow and fix a few bugs and issues, mostly related to shuffling the old hasher name into the transaction.
This doesn't touch anything user-visible yet.
Test Plan: Ran unit tests.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18897
Summary:
Ref T13043. This provides a new piece of shared infrastructure that VCS passwords and account passwords can use to validate passwords that users enter.
This isn't reachable by anything yet.
The test coverage of the "upgrade" flow (where we rehash a password to use a stronger hasher) isn't great in this diff, I'll expand that in the next change and then start migrating things.
Test Plan: Added a bunch of unit tests.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18896
Summary:
Ref T13043. Currently:
- Passwords are stored separately in the "VCS Passwords" and "User" tables and don't share as much code as they could.
- Because User objects are all over the place in the code, password hashes are all over the place too (i.e., often somewhere in process memory). This is a very low-severity, theoretical sort of issue, but it could make leaving a stray `var_dump()` in the code somewhere a lot more dangerous than it otherwise is. Even if we never do this, third-party developers might. So it "feels nice" to imagine separating this data into a different table that we rarely load.
- Passwords can not be //revoked//. They can be //deleted//, but users can set the same password again. If you believe or suspect that a password may have been compromised, you might reasonably prefer to revoke it and force the user to select a //different// password.
This change prepares to remedy these issues by adding a new, more modern dedicated password storage table which supports storing multiple password types (account vs VCS), gives passwords real PHIDs and transactions, supports DestructionEngine, supports revocation, and supports `bin/auth revoke`.
It doesn't actually make anything use this new table yet. Future changes will migrate VCS passwords and account passwords to this table.
(This also gives third party applications a reasonable place to store password hashes in a consistent way if they have some need for it.)
Test Plan: Added some basic unit tests to cover general behavior. This is just skeleton code for now and will get more thorough testing when applications move.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18894
Summary: Ref T13043. Adds CLI support for revoking SSH keys. Also retargets UI language from "Deactivate" to "Revoke" to make it more clear that this is a one-way operation. This operation is already correctly implemented as a "Revoke" operation.
Test Plan: Used `bin/auth revoke --type ssh` to revoke keys, verified they became revoked (with proper transactions) in the UI. Revoked keys from the web UI flow.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18893
Summary: Ref T13043. Allows CLI revocation of login sessions.
Test Plan: Used `bin/auth revoke --type session` with `--from` and `--everywhere` to revoke sessions. Saw accounts get logged out in web UI.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13043
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18892
Summary: Ref T13025. Fixes T10973. Fairly straightforward. The "points" type is just an alias for "text" today.
Test Plan: Bulk edited points.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025, T10973
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18889
Summary:
See <https://discourse.phabricator-community.org/t/files-created-from-repository-contents-slightly-over-one-chunk-in-size-are-truncated-to-exactly-one-chunk-in-size/988/1>. Three issues here:
- When we finish reading `git cat-file ...` or whatever, we can end up with more than one chunk worth of bytes left in the internal buffer if the read is fast. Use `while` instead of `if` to make sure we write the whole buffer.
- Limiting output with `setStdoutSizeLimit()` isn't really a reliable way to limit the size if we're also reading from the buffer. It's also pretty indirect and confusing. Instead, just let the `FileUploadSource` explicitly implement a byte limit in a straightforward way.
- We weren't setting the time limit correctly on the main path.
Overall, this could cause >4MB files to "write" as 4MB files, with the rest of the file left in the UploadSource buffer. Since these files were technically under the limit, they could return as valid. This was intermittent.
Test Plan:
- Pushed a ~4.2MB file.
- Reloaded Diffusion a bunch, sometimes saw the `while/if` buffer race and produce a 4MB file with a prompt to download it. (Other times, the buffer worked right and the page just says "this file is too big, sorry").
- Applied patches.
- Reloaded Diffusion a bunch, no longer saw bad behavior or truncated files.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18885
Summary:
Fixes T13042. This hooks up the new "silent" mode from D18882 and makes it actually work.
The UI (where we tell you to go run some command and then reload the page) is pretty clumsy, but should solve some problems for now and can be cleaned up eventually. The actual mechanics (timeline aggregation, Herald interaction, etc.) are on firmer ground.
Test Plan:
- Made a normal bulk edit, got mail and feed stories.
- Made a silent bulk edit, no mail and no feed.
- Saw "Silent Edit" marker in timeline for silent edits:
{F5386245}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13042
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18883
Summary:
Ref T13042. This adds a "silent" edit mechanism which suppresses feed stories, email, and notifications.
The other behaviors here are:
- The transactions are marked as "silent" so we can render a hint in the UI in the future to make it clear to users that they aren't missing email.
- If the editor uses Herald, mail rules are suppressed so they don't fire incorrectly (this mostly affects "the first time this rule matches, send me an email" rules: without this, they'd match "the first time" on the bulk edit, not send email, then never match again since they already matched).
- If the edit queues additional edits, those are applied silently too.
This doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't) actually change any behavior since you can't apply silent edits yet.
Test Plan:
Somewhat theoretical, since this isn't reachable yet. Should get meaningful testing in an upcoming change.
Did a bit of var_dump() / debug poking to attempt to verify that nothing too crazy is happening.
Viewed and edited objects, no changes in behavior.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13042
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18882
Summary: Ref T13025. We're getting kind of a lot of actions, so put them in nice groups so they're easier to work with.
Test Plan: {F5386038}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18880
Summary: Depends on D18867. Ref T13025. Fixes T8740. Rebuilds the tag/subscriber actions (add, remove, set) into the bulk editor.
Test Plan: Added, removed and set these values via bulk edit.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025, T8740
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18868
Summary:
Depends on D18866. Ref T13025. Fixes T12415. This makes the old "Add Comment" action work, and adds support for a new "Set description to" action (possibly, I could imagine "append description" being useful some day, maybe).
The implementation is just a `<textarea />`, not a whole fancy remarkup box with `[Bold] [Italic] ...` buttons, preview, typeaheads, etc. It would be nice to enrich this eventually but doing the rendering in pure JS is currently very involved.
This requires a little bit of gymnastics to get the transaction populated properly, and adds some extra validation since we need some code there anyway.
Test Plan:
- Changed the description of a task via bulk editor.
- Added a comment to a task via bulk editor.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025, T12415
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18867
Summary: Depends on D18864. Ref T13025. Adds bulk edit support back for "status" and "priority" using `<select />` controls.
Test Plan:
Used bulk editor to change status and priority for tasks.
{F5374436}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18866
Summary: Depends on D18863. Ref PHI173. Ref T13025. After D18863, this job type is no longer used: the workflow uses a genric worker instead which can apply transactions to any object.
Test Plan: Grepped for callsites, found none.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18864
Summary:
Depends on D18862. See PHI173. Ref T13025. Fixes T10005. This redefines bulk edits in terms of EditEngine fields, rather than hard-coding the whole thing.
Only text fields -- and, specifically, only the "Title" field -- are supported after this change. Followup changes will add more bulk edit parameter types and broader field support.
However, the title field now works without any Maniphest-specific code, outside of the small amount of binding code in the `ManiphestBulkEditor` subclass.
Test Plan: Used the bulk edit workflow to change the titles of tasks.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025, T10005
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18863
Summary:
Depends on D18806. Ref T13025. See PHI173. Currently, Maniphest bulk edits are processed by a Maniphest-specific worker. I want to replace this with a generic worker which can apply transactional edits to any object.
This implements a generic worker, although it has no callers yet. Future changes give it callers, and later remove the Maniphest-specific worker.
Test Plan: See next changes.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18862
Summary:
Depends on D18805. Ref T13025. Fixes T10268.
Instead of using a list of IDs for the bulk editor, power it with SearchEngine queries. This gives us the full power of SearchEngine and lets us use a query key instead of a list of 20,000 IDs to avoid issues with URL lengths.
Also, split it into a base `BulkEngine` and per-application subclasses. This moves us toward T10005 and universal support for bulk operations.
Also:
- Renames most of "batch" to "bulk": we're curently inconsitent about this, I like "bulk" better since I think it's more clear if you don't regularly interact with `.bat` files, and newer stuff mostly uses "bulk".
- When objects in the result set can't be edited because you don't have permission, show the status more clearly.
This probably breaks some stuff a bit since I refactored so heavily, but it seems mostly OK from poking around. I'll clean up anything I missed in followups to deal with remaining items on T13025.
Test Plan:
{F5302300}
- Bulk edited from Maniphest.
- Bulk edited from a workboard (no more giant `?ids=....` in the URL).
- Hit most of the error conditions, I think?
- Clicked the "Cancel" button.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13025, T10268
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18806
Summary:
Depends on D18848. Ref PHI243. This puts a bit of logic up front to figure out the blueprint type before we actually start editing it.
This implementation is a little messy but it keeps the API clean. Eventually, the implementation could probably go in the TransactionTypes so more code is shared, but I'd like to wait for a couple more of these first.
This capability probably isn't too useful, but just pays down a bit of technical debt from the caveat introduced in D18822.
Test Plan:
- Created a new blueprint with the API.
- Tried to create a blueprint without a "type" (got a helpful error).
- Created and edited blueprints via the web UI.
- Tried to change the "type" of an existing blueprint (got a helpful error).
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Subscribers: PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18849
Summary: Ref PHI243. This is a followup to D18822, which added an edit-only `drydock.blueprint.edit`. By modularizing transactions (here) and then adding a "type" transaction (next change) I intend to remove the "edit-only" limitation and make this API method fully functional.
Test Plan: Created and edited blueprints via the web UI. Edited blueprints via the API. Disabled/enabled blueprints (currently web UI only).
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Subscribers: PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18845
Summary:
Fixes T13031. "Enormous" changes are basically changes which are too large to hold in memory, although the actual definition we use today is "more than 1GB of change text or `git diff` runs for more than 15 minutes".
If an install configures a Herald content rule like "when content matches /XYZ/, do something" and then a user pushes a 30 GB source file, we can't put it into memory to `preg_match()` it. Currently, the way to handle this case is to write a separate Herald rule that rejects enormous changes. However, this isn't obvious and means the default behavior is unsafe.
Make the default behavior safe by rejecting these changes with a message, similar to how we reject "dangerous" changes (which permanently delete or overwrite history) by default.
Also, change a couple of UI strings from "Enormous" to "Very Large" to reduce ambiguity. See <https://discourse.phabricator-community.org/t/herald-enormous-check/822>.
Test Plan: Changed the definition of "enormous" from 1GB to 1 byte. Pushed a change; got rejected. Allowed enormous changes, pushed, got rejected by a Herald rule. Disabled the Herald rule, pushed, got a clean push. Prevented enormous changes again. Grepped for "enormous" elsewhere in the UI.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Subscribers: joshuaspence
Maniphest Tasks: T13031
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18850
Summary:
See PHI262. Fixes T12578. Although this is a bit niche and probably better accomplished through advisory/soft measures ("Add blocking reviewers") in most cases, it isn't difficult to implement and doesn't create any technical or product tension.
If installs write a rule that blocks commits, that will probably also naturally lead them to an "add reviewers" rule anyway.
Also, allow packages to be hit with the typeahead. They're valid reviewers but previously you couldn't write rules against them, for no actual reason.
Test Plan: Used test console to run this against commits, got sensible results for the field value.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T12578
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18839
Summary:
See PHI223. Ref T13024. There's a remaining registration/login order issue after the other changes in T13024: we lose track of the current URI when we go through the MFA flow, so we can lose "Set Password" at the end of the flow.
Specifically, the flow goes like this today:
- User clicks the welcome link in email.
- They get redirected to the "set password" settings panel.
- This gets pre-empted by Legalpad (although we'll potentially survive this with the URI intact).
- This also gets pre-empted by the "Set MFA" workflow. If the user completes this flow, they get redirected to a `/auth/multifactor/?id=123` sort of URI to highlight the factor they added. This causes us to lose the `/settings/panel/password/blah/blah?key=xyz` URI.
The ordering on this is also not ideal; it's preferable to start with a password, then do the other steps, so the user can return to the flow more easily if they are interrupted.
Resolve this by separating the "change your password" and "set/reset your password" flows onto two different pages. This copy/pastes a bit of code, but both flows end up simpler so it feels reasonable to me overall.
We don't require a full session for "set/reset password" (so you can do it if you don't have MFA/legalpad yet) and do it first.
This works better and is broadly simpler for users.
Test Plan:
- Required MFA + legalpad, invited a user via email, registered.
- Before: password set flow got lost when setting MFA.
- After: prompted to set password, then sign documents, then set up MFA.
- Reset password (with MFA confgiured, was required to MFA first).
- Tried to reset password without a valid reset key, wasn't successful.
- Changed password using existing flow.
- Hit various (all?) error cases (short password, common password, mismatch, missing password, etc).
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13024
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18840
Summary:
See PHI242. All use cases for this that I know of are pretty hacky, but they don't seem perilous, and it's easier than webhooks.
See P1895, T10183, and T9853 for me previously refusing to implement this since all those use cases were also pretty bad.
Test Plan:
- Wrote a rule to add comments, saw it add comments.
- Reviewed summary, re-edited rule, reviewed transcript to check that all the strings worked OK.
- Wrote a new rule for a non-commentable object (a blog) to make sure I wasn't offered the "Add a comment" action.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18823
Summary:
Ref: https://admin.phacility.com/PHI243
Since our use case primarily focuses on transaction editing, this patch implements the `drydock.blueprint.edit` api method with the understanding that:
a) this is a work in progress
b) object editing is supported, but object creation is not yet implemented
Test Plan:
* updated existing blueprints via Conduit UI
* regression tested `maniphest.edit` by creating new and updating existing tasks
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin, yelirekim, jcox
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18822
Summary:
Ref T10233. See PHI231. When users ignore the `arc land` prompt about bad revision states, make it explicitly clear in the transaction log that they broke the rules.
You can currently figure this out by noticing that there's no "This revision is accepted and ready to land." message, but it's unrealistic to expect non-expert users to look for the //absence// of a message to indicate something, and this state change is often relevant.
Test Plan: {F5302351}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T10233
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18808
Summary:
Use ClassQuery to find datasources for the quick-search.
Mostly, this allows extensions to add quicksearches.
Test Plan:
using `/typeahead/class/`, tested several search terms that make sense.
Removed the tag interface from a datasource, which removed it from results.
Reviewers: epriestley, amckinley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18760
Summary:
See PHI173. Adds custom field support for Herald actions, and implements actions for "Datasource/Tokenizer" fields.
The only action available for now is "set field to...". Other actions ("Add values", "Remove values") might make sense in the future for these fields, but there's currently no use case. For most other field types (text, select, checkbox, etc) only "Set to" makes sense.
Test Plan:
- Added a "datasource" custom field to the custom field definition in Config.
- Added a "if field is empty, set field to default value X" rule to Herald.
- Created a task with a nonempty field: no Herald trigger.
- Created a task with an empty field: Herald fired.
- Reviewed rule and transcripts for text strings.
{F5297615}
{F5297616}
{F5297617}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18784
Summary:
Ref T13012. These flags can be exploited by attackers to execute code remotely. See T13012 for discussion and context.
Additionally, harden some Mercurial commands where possible (by using additional quoting or embedding arguments in other constructs) so they resist these flags and behave properly when passed arguments with these values.
Test Plan:
- Added unit tests.
- Verified "--config" and "--debugger" commands are rejected.
- Verified more commands now work properly even with branches and files named `--debugger`, although not all of them do.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13012
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18769
Summary:
Ref T2543. Instead of autosubmitting revisions to "Needs Review" when builds finish, allow them to be held in "Draft" indefinitely.
There's currently no UI for this. I plan to just expose it as `arc diff --draft` for now, in a followup change.
Test Plan:
- Created a revision (via Conduit) with "hold as draft", saw it hold as draft after builds finished.
- Created a revision (normally), saw it autosubmit after builds finished.
- Requested review of a "hold as draft" revision to kick it out of draft state.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T2543
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18737
Summary: See PHI90. For now, this only provides a limited amount of information, but should satisfy the use case in PHI90 and build toward a more complete version in the future.
Test Plan: Used new Conduit method to retrieve information about diffs.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18744
Summary:
Ref T2543. Fixes T10109.
Currently, Herald only runs in Differential when a change updates the diff. This is partly for historical reasons, and partly because we don't want to restart builds every time someone makes a comment. However, this behavior is inconsistent with other applications (which always trigger on any change), and occasionally confusing to users (in T10109, for example) or otherwise undesirable.
A similar issue is that T2543 has introduced a "Draft" state, where revisions don't send normal mail until builds finish. This interacts poorly with "Send me an email" rules (which shouldn't do anything here) and particularly with "Send me an email + only run these actions the first time the rule matches", since that might have an effect like "do nothing when the revision is created, then never anything again since you already did nothing once".
To navigate both of these issues, let objects tell Herald that certain actions (like mail or builds) are currently forbidden. If a rule uses a field or action which is currently forbidden, the whole rule automatically fails before it executes, but doesn't count toward "only the first time" as far as Herald's tracking of rule execution is concerned.
Then, forbid mail for draft revisions, and forbid builds for revisions which didn't just get updated. Forbidding mail fixes the issues with "Send me an email" that were created by the introduction of the draft state.
Finally, make Herald run on every revision update, not just substantive updates to the diff. This resolves T10109.
Test Plan:
Created revisions via the draft -> submit workflow, saw different transcripts. Here's a mail action being forbidden for a draft:
{F5237324}
Here's a build action being forbidden for a "mundane" update:
{F5237326}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Subscribers: PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Maniphest Tasks: T10109, T2543
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18731
Summary: See PHI177. Ref T12974. PonderQuestion was overlooked during the Ferret engine conversions.
Test Plan:
Ran migrations, searched for questions, got results:
{F5241185}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T12974
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18736
Summary: Ref T2543. When revisions are in the draft state, tell the user what we're waiting for or why they aren't moving forward.
Test Plan: {F5228840}
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T2543
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D18714
