Summary: Allows feed stories and mail for new Phame Posts.
Test Plan: Write Post, Get Mail
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14426
Summary:
Fix T9662.
Record who initiated the build, and allow this information as a parameter.
In this implementation, a 're-run' keeps the original initiator, which we maybe not desired?
Test Plan:
Make a HTTP step with initiator.phid, trigger manually, via HM, via ./bin/harbormaster build.
Look at requests made.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9662
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14380
Summary: We haven't seen any issues here, remove the table and schema spec.
Test Plan: Not yet tested.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14067
Summary:
Ref T9614. Currently, a lot of Build Plan behavior is covered by a global "can manage" policy.
One install in particular is experiencing difficulty with warring factions within engineering aborting one another's builds.
As a first step to remedy this, and also generally make Harbormaster more flexible and bring it in line with other applications in terms of policy power:
- Give Build Plans normal view/edit policies.
- Require "Can Edit" to run a plan manually.
Having "Can View" on plans may be a little weird in some cases (the status of a Buildable might be bad because of a build you can't see) but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.
Next change here will require "Can Edit" to abort a build. This will reasonably allow installs to reserve pause/abort for administrators/adults. (I might let anyone restart a plan, though?)
Test Plan:
- Created a new build plan.
- Verified defaults were inherited from application defaults (swapped them around, too).
- Saved build plan.
- Edited policies.
- Verified autoplans get the right policies.
- Verified old plans got migrated properly.
- Tried to run a plan I couldn't edit (denied).
- Ran a plan from CLI with `bin/harbormaster`.
- Tried to create a plan with an unprivileged user.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9614
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14321
Summary:
It's hard for us to predict how long patches and migrations will take in the general case since it varies a lot from install to install, but we can give installs some kind of rough heads up about longer patches. I'm planning to just put a sort of hint for things in the changelog, something like this:
{F905579}
To make this easier, start storing how long stuff took. I'll write a little script to dump this into a table for the changelog.
Test Plan:
Ran `bin/storage status`:
{F905580}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14320
Summary:
Ref T182. This doesn't do anything interesting yet and is mostly scaffolding, but here's roughly the workflow. From previous revision, you can configure "Repository Automation" for a repository:
{F875741}
If it's configured, a new "Land Revision" button shows up:
{F875743}
Once you click it you get a big warning dialog that it won't work, and then this shows up at the top of the revision (completely temporary/placeholder UI, some day a nice progress bar or whatever):
{F875747}
If you're lucky, the operation eventually sort of works:
{F875750}
It only runs `git show` right now, doesn't actually do any writes or anything.
Test Plan:
- Clicked "Land Revision".
- Watched `phd debug task`.
- Saw it log `git show` to output.
- Verified operation success in UI (by fiddling URL, no way to get there normally yet).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: revi
Maniphest Tasks: T182
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14266
Summary:
Ref T9551. We currently use the same logic for generating project hashtags and Phriction slugs, but should be a little more conservative with project hashtags.
Stop them from generating with stuff that won't parse in a "Reviewers:" field or generally in commments (commas, colons, etc).
Test Plan:
Created a bunch of projects with nonsense in them and saw them generate pretty reasonable hashtags.
{F873456}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9551
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14261
Summary:
Ref T9519. When acquiring leases on resources:
- Only consider resources created by authorized blueprints.
- Only consider authorized blueprints when creating new resources.
- Fail with a tailored error if no blueprints are allowed.
- Fail with a tailored error if missing authorizations are causing acquisition failure.
One somewhat-substantial issue with this is that it's pretty hard to figure out from the Harbormaster side. Specifically, the Build step UI does not show field value anywhere, so the presence of unapproved blueprints is not communicated. This is much more clear in Drydock. I'll plan to address this in future changes to Harbormaster, since there are other related/similar issues anyway.
Test Plan: {F872527}
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9519
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14254
Summary:
Ref T9519. This is like 80% of the way there and doesn't fully work yet, but roughly shows the shape of things to come. Here's how it works:
First, there's a new custom field type for blueprints which works like a normal typeahead but has some extra logic. It's implemented this way to make it easy to add to Blueprints in Drydock and Build Plans in Harbormaster. Here, I've added a "Use Blueprints" field to the "WorkingCopy" blueprint, so you can control which hosts the working copies are permitted to allocate on:
{F869865}
This control has a bit of custom rendering logic. Instead of rendering a normal list of PHIDs, it renders an annotated list with icons:
{F869866}
These icons show whether the blueprint on the other size of the authorization has approved this object. Once you have a green checkmark, you're good to go.
On the blueprint side, things look like this:
{F869867}
This table shows all the objects which have asked for access to this blueprint. In this case it's showing that one object is approved to use the blueprint since I already approved it, but by default new requests come in here as "Authorization Requested" and someone has to go approve them.
You approve them from within the authorization detail screen:
{F869868}
You can use the "Approve" or "Decline" buttons to allow or prevent use of the blueprint.
This doesn't actually do anything yet -- objects don't need to be authorized in order to use blueprints quite yet. That will come in the next diff, I just wanted to get the UI in reasonable shape first.
The authorization also has a second piece of state, which is whether the request from the object is active or inactive. We use this to keep track of the authorization if the blueprint is (maybe temporarily) deleted.
For example, you might have a Build Plan that uses Blueprints A and B. For a couple days, you only want to use A, so you remove B from the "Use Blueprints: ..." field. Later, you can add B back and it will connect to its old authorization again, so you don't need to go re-approve things (and if you're declined, you stay declined instead of being able to request authorization over and over again). This should make working with authorizations a little easier and less labor intensive.
Stuff not in this diff:
- Actually preventing any allocations (next diff).
- Probably should have transactions for approve/decline, at least, at some point, so there's a log of who did approvals and when.
- Maybe should have a more clear/loud error state when no blueprints are approved?
- Should probably restrict the typeahead to specific blueprint types.
Test Plan:
- Added the field.
- Typed some stuff into it.
- Saw the UI update properly.
- Approved an authorization.
- Declined an authorization.
- Saw active authorizations on a blueprint page.
- Didn't see any inactive authroizations there.
- Clicked "View All Authorizations", saw all authorizations.
Reviewers: chad, hach-que
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9519
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14251
Summary:
Fixes T9500. All the code is fine in D13836, but the value of the constant got updated (from "open" to "active") and the migration still used the old value.
Correct any affected dashboards to use the proper constant.
This only affected old dashboards: newly created ones use the right constant.
Test Plan: Ran migration, verified that all active dashboards appeared on "Active Dashboards".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9500
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14223
Summary: Ref T9352. See D13635. Build targets can have variables already, but let builds have them too. This mostly enables future use cases (sub-builds, more sophisticated build triggers).
Test Plan: With a custom Herald rule + action like the one in T9352, updated a revision and saw it generate multiple builds with varying parameters.
Reviewers: chad, hach-que
Reviewed By: hach-que
Maniphest Tasks: T9352
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14222
Summary:
Ref T9252. Long ago you sometimes manually created resources, so they had human-enterable names. However, users never make resources manually any more, so this field isn't really useful any more.
In particular, it means we write a lot of untranslatable strings like "Working Copy" to the database in the default locale. Instead, do the call at runtime so resource names are translatable.
Also clean up a few minor things I hit while kicking the tires here.
It's possible we might eventually want to introduce a human-choosable label so you can rename your favorite resources and this would just be a default name. I don't really have much of a use case for that yet, though, and I'm not sure there will ever be one.
Test Plan:
- Restarted a Harbormaster build, got a clean build.
- Released all leases/resources, restarted build, got a clean build with proper resource names.
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: hach-que, chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14213
Summary:
Ref T9252. Several general changes here:
- Moves logs to use PHIDs instead of IDs. This generally improves flexibility (for example, it's a lot easier to render handles).
- Adds `blueprintPHID` to logs. Although you can usually figure this out from the leasePHID or resourcePHID, it lets us query relevant logs on Blueprint views.
- Instead of making logs a top-level object, make them strictly a sub-object of Blueprints, Resources and Leases. So you go Drydock > Lease > Logs, etc., to get to logs.
- I might restore the "everything" view eventually, but it doesn't interact well with policies and I'm not sure it's very useful. A policy-violating `bin/drydock log` might be cleaner.
- Policy-wise, we always show you that logs exist, we just don't show you log content if it's about something you can't see. This is similar to seeing restricted handles in other applications.
- Instead of just having a message, give logs "type" + "data". This will let logs be more structured and translatable. This is similar to recent changes to Herald which seem to have worked well.
Test Plan:
Added some placeholder log writes, viewed those logs in the UI.
{F855199}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14196
Summary: I haven't regenerated this for a while and it makes instances and unit tests a little faster.
Test Plan:
- Manually reviewed changes for sanity.
- Ran `arc unit --everything`.
- Observed runtime drop from ~15-16 seconds to ~12-13 seconds.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14192
Summary:
Fixes T6569. This implements an expiry mechanism for Drydock resources which parallels the mechanism for leases.
A few things are missing that we'll probably need in the future:
- An "EXPIRES" command to update the expiration time. This would let resources be permanent while leased, then expire after, say, 24 hours without any leases.
- A callback like `shouldActuallyExpireRightNow()` for resources and leases that lets them decide not to expire at the last second.
- A callback like `didAcquireLease()` for resource blueprints, to parallel `didReleaseLease()`, letting them clear or extend their timer.
However, this stuff would mostly just let us tune behaviors, not really open up new capabilities.
Test Plan: Changed host resources to expire after 60 seconds, leased one, saw it vanish 60 seconds later.
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6569
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14176
Summary: Ref T9252. If you have a blueprint and you do not like that blueprint very much, you can disable it.
Test Plan: Disabled / enabled some blueprints.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14156
Summary:
Ref T9252. Drydock currently uses integer statuses, but there's no reason for this (they don't need to be ordered) and it makes debugging them, working with them, future APIs, etc., more cumbersome.
Switch to string instead.
Also rename `STATUS_OPEN` to `STATUS_ACTIVE` and `STATUS_CLOSED` to `STATUS_RELEASED` for consistency. This makes resources and leases have more similar states, and gives resource states more accurate names.
Test Plan: Browsed web UI, grepped for changed constants, applied patch, inspected database.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14153
Summary:
Ref T9252. Leases currently have a `resourceID`, but this is a bit nonstandard and generally less flexible than giving them a `resourcePHID`.
In particular, a `resourcePHID` is easier to use when rendering interfaces, since you can get handles out of a PHID.
Add a PHID column, copy over all the PHIDs that correspond to existing IDs, then drop the ID column.
Test Plan:
- Browsed web UIs.
- Inspected database during/after migration.
- Grepped for `resourceID`.
- Allocated a new lease with `bin/drydock lease`.
Reviewers: chad, hach-que
Reviewed By: hach-que
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14151
Summary:
Ref T9464. If an ancient transaction doesn't have array values for whatever reason, we fail here.
Instead, just recover as gracefully as we can. We may get the transaction "wrong" in some sense, but this only impacts what is rendered in the transaction log.
Test Plan: This is nearly a year old and there's no real way to test it.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9464
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14149
Summary:
Ref T9252. This simplifies some Drydock code.
Most of this code relates to the old notion of Drydock being able to enumerate all the tasks it needs to complete in order to acquire a lease. The code has stepped back from this, since it's unnecessary, the queue is more powerful than it used to be, and it would be a lot of work to keep track of.
The ~only thing that should ever wait for leases in modern code is `bin/drydock lease`, and it's fine for it to just sit there sleeping, so this just does that.
This reduces the granularity of logging, but I'll address that separately in future logging-focused changes.
Test Plan: Used `bin/drydock lease` to acquire a lease, saw it acquire cleanly.
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14147
Summary:
Ref T9252. Broadly, Drydock currently races on releasing objects from the "active" state. To reproduce this:
- Scatter some sleep()s pretty much anywhere in the release code.
- Release several times from web UI or CLI in quick succession.
Resources or leases will execute some release code twice or otherwise do inconsistent things.
(I didn't chase down a detailed reproduction scenario for this since inspection of the code makes it clear that there are no meaningful locks or mechanisms preventing this.)
Instead, add a Harbormaster-style command queue to resources and leases. When something wants to do a release, it adds a command to the queue and schedules a worker. The workers acquire a lock, then try to consume commands from the queue.
This guarantees that only one process is responsible for writes to active resource/leases.
This is the last major step to giving resources and leases a single writer during all states:
- Resource, Unsaved: AllocatorWorker
- Resource, Pending: ResourceWorker (Possible rename to "Allocated?")
- Resource, Open: This diff, ResourceUpdateWorker. (Likely rename to "Active").
- Resource, Closed/Broken: Future destruction worker. (Likely rename to "Released" / "Broken"; maybe remove "Broken").
- Resource, Destroyed: No writes.
- Lease, Unsaved: Whatever wants the lease.
- Lease, Pending: AllocatorWorker
- Lease, Acquired: LeaseWorker
- Lease, Active: This diff, LeaseUpdateWorker.
- Lease, Released/Broken: Future destruction worker (Maybe remove "Broken"?)
- Lease, Expired: No writes. (Likely rename to "Destroyed").
In most phases, we can already guarantee that there is a single writer without doing any extra work. This is more complicated in the "Active" case because the release buttons on the web UI, the release tools on the CLI, the lease requestor itself, the garbage collector, and any other release process cleaning up related objects may try to effect a release. All of these could race one another (and, in many cases, race other processes from other phases because all of these get to act immediately) as this code is currently written. Using a queue here lets us make sure there's only a single writer in this phase.
One thing which is notable is that whatever acquires a lease **can not write to it**! It is never the writer once it queues the lease for activation. It can not write to any resources, either. And, likewise, Blueprints can not write to resources while acquiring or releasing leases.
We may need to provide a mechinism so that blueprints and/or resource/lease holders get to attach some storage to resources/leases for bookkeeping. For example, a blueprint might need to keep some kind of cache on a resource to help it manage state. But I think we can cross that bridge when we come to it, and nothing else would need to write to this storage so it's technically straightforward to introduce such a mechanism if we need one.
Test Plan:
- Viewed buttons in web UI, checked enabled/disabled states.
- Clicked the buttons.
- Saw commands show up in the command queue.
- Saw some daemon stuff get scheduled.
- Ran CLI tools, saw commands get consumed and resources/leases release.
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9252
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14143
Summary:
See discussion in D10304. There's a lot of context there, but the general idea is:
- Blueprints should manage locks in a granular way during the actual allocation/acquisition phase.
- Optimistic "slot locks" might a pretty good primitive to make that easy to implement and reason about in most cases.
The way these locks work is that you just pick some name for the lock (like the PHID of a resource) and say that it needs to be acquired for the allocation/acquisition to work:
```
...
->needSlotLock("mylock(PHID-XYZQ-...)")
...
```
When you fire off the acquisition or allocation, it fails unless it could acquire the slot with that name. This is really simple (no explicit lock management) and a pretty good fit for most of the locking that blueprints and leases need to do.
If you need to do limit-based locks (e.g., maximum of 3 locks) you could acquire a lock like this:
```
mylock(whatever).slot(2)
```
Blueprints generally only contend with themselves, so it's normally OK for them to pick whatever strategy works best for them in naming locks.
This may not work as well if you have a huge number of slots (e.g., 100TB you want to give out in 1MB chunks), or other complex needs for locks (like you have to synchronize access to some external resource), but slot locks don't need to be the only mechanism that blueprints use. If they run into a problem that slot locks aren't a good fit for, they can use something else instead. For now, slot locks seem like a good fit for the problems we currently face and most of the problems I anticipate facing.
(The release workflows have other race issues which I'm not addressing here. They work fine if nothing races, but aren't race-safe.)
Test Plan:
To create a race where the same binding is allocated as a resource twice:
- Add `sleep(10)` near the beginning of `allocateResource()`, after the free bindings are loaded but before resources are allocated.
- (Comment out slot lock acquisition if you have this patch.)
- Run `bin/drydock lease ...` in two windows, within 10 seconds of one another.
This will reliably double-allocate the binding because both blueprints see a view of the world where the binding is free.
To verify the lock works, un-comment it (or apply this patch) and run the same test again. Now, the lock fails in one process and only one resource is allocated.
Reviewers: hach-que, chad
Reviewed By: hach-que, chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14118
Summary: Fixes T9351. This is straightforward since this application is now relatively modern and doesn't have any bizarre craziness.
Test Plan:
{F787981}
{F787982}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9351
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14093
Summary:
One of the migrations in rPa335004a91 (`20150730.herald.5.sql`) incorrectly swapped "add" and "add blocking" Differential Herald rules.
Swap any rules last modified before this patch was applied back. This is the best we can do without possibly overwriting more recent, intentional data. I'll issue some guidance on this in the changelog.
Test Plan:
- Made a rule, ran patch, no change.
- Changed rule modified time to a few months ago, ran patch, saw swap from non-blocking to blocking.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14061
Summary: Adds an additional field for questions, an answer wiki, should should usually be community editable.
Test Plan: New question, edit question, no wiki, lots of wiki.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14003
Summary: Until we have a proper close as duplicate workflow for Ponder, remove the option with something more sensible.
Test Plan: Closed a question as invalid, saw it closed and in feed.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14007
Summary:
Ref T8783. Sort out some relationships and fields:
- Make Items 1:1 with Queues: each item is always in exactly one queue. Minor discussion on T8783. I think this is easier to understand and reason about (and implement!) and can't come up with any real cases where it isn't powerful enough.
- Remove "QueueItem", which allowed items to be in multiple queues at once.
- Remove "dateNuanced", which is equivalent to "dateCreated" in all cases.
Then add really basic routing:
- Add "Default Queue" for Sources. New items from the source route into that queue.
- (Some day there will be routing rules, but for now the rule is "always route into the default queue".)
- Show queue on items.
- Show more / more useful edit history and transactions in several UIs.
Test Plan:
{F749445}
{F749446}
{F749447}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8783
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13988
Summary: Fixes T8428. Adds status to packages, allows setting and application search. I presume though these need checked elsewhere?
Test Plan: New package, edit package, archive package, run search queries.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T8428
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13925
Summary:
Ref T8659. In the general case, this eventually allows build processes to do things like:
- Upload build results (like a ".app" or ".exe" or other binary).
- Pass complex results between build steps (e.g., build step A does something hard and build step B uses it to do something else).
Today, we're a long way away from having the infrastructure for that. However, it is useful to let third party build processes (like Jenkins) upload URIs that link back to the external build results.
This adds `harbormaster.createartifact` so they can do that. The only useful thing to do with this method today is have your Jenkins build do this:
params = array(
"uri": "https://jenkins.mycompany.com/build/23923/details/",
"name": "View Build Results in Jenkins",
"ui.external": true,
);
harbormaster.createartifact(target, 'uri', params);
Then (after the next diff) we'll show a link in Differential and a prominent link in Harbormaster. I didn't actually do the UI stuff in this diff since it's already pretty big.
This change moves a lot of code around, too:
- Adds PHIDs to artifacts.
- It modularizes build artifact types (currently "file", "host" and "URI").
- It formalizes build artifact parameters and construction:
- This lets me generate usable documentation about how to create artifacts.
- This prevents users from doing dangerous or policy-violating things.
- It does some other general modernization.
Test Plan:
{F715633}
{F715634}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8659
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13900
Summary: Ref T9173, adds basic hide support for answers. Answer authors and Moderators can hide answers, unhide them.
Test Plan: Hide answer, log into other account, see hidden message. Mark as visible, see answer again.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9173
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13894
Summary: Ref T6920, This removes the PonderVotableInterface from PonderQuestion and assocaited code. Also... never used?
Test Plan: Visit Ponder, See List, New Question, Add Answer.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T6920
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13833
Summary: This allows installs to essentially set a "moderator" for Ponder, who can clean up answers. Fixes T9098
Test Plan: Edit an answer I don't own.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9098
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13818
Summary: This fails to apply on my second sandbox with incorrect DOUBLE value. Reran SQL, works as expected.
Test Plan: Rerun new SQL on ponder_question table
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13830
Summary: Ref T9096. This is a first cut at adding additional statuses, happy to add or subtract as needed... maybe even configurable? Also, the dialog doesn't seem to fire, I'll keep debugging.
Test Plan: Close and Reopen many questions. Test applicationSearch params by seeing resolved questions, all questions.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9096
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13826
Summary: Ref T9076, adds basic plumbing for setting the state of a Paste.
Test Plan: Archive Paste, Activate Paste, New Paste
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9076
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13801
Summary: Ref T8493, Ref T3578. Adds spaces support to ponder.
Test Plan: Ask a question in a new space, see new question.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3578, T8493
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13792
Summary: Ref T3578, adds ability to set a default edit and view policy for questions. Not sure what to set viewPolicy to ?
Test Plan: Test an old question, edit policy still on myself. Test a new question, see new default.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3578
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13791
Summary: Ref T3846. Adds mailkey generation and migration.
Test Plan: Ran the migration, see keys in mysql.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3846
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13785
Summary: Ref T8726. Convert these to be modular.
Test Plan:
- Created rules using these actions.
- Upgraded them.
- Verified they still work.
{F659266}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: joshuaspence, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8726
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13705
Summary: Ref T8726. No surprises.
Test Plan:
Created rules using both action variants, applied upgrade, saw rules still work correctly.
{F658842}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: joshuaspence, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8726
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13701
Summary: Ref T8726. Converts these actions to be modular. No real surprises in this change.
Test Plan:
{F658709}
- Wrote some rules.
- Migrated them forward.
- Used a bunch of these rules.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: joshuaspence, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8726
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13699
Summary:
Fixes T8958. I renamed this class and table (in D13644), but the migration `20150606.mlist.1.php` needs to load records from the table before the table rename applies.
Put the table back and accept a tiny bit of cruft here to fix this problem. We can no-op the migration after a while.
I'll cherry-pick this to `stable`.
Test Plan: Applied migration. Created Herald rules. Reviewed existing Herald rules.
Reviewers: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8958
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13736
Summary: Drops the sql column.
Test Plan: View logged in and logged out badges, edited some too.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13715
