Summary:
Ref T13513. This still has quite a few rough edges and some significant performance isssues, but appears to mostly work.
Allow reviewers to "Suggest Edit" on an inline comment and provide replacement text for the highlighted source.
Test Plan: Created, edited, reloaded, and submitted inline comments in various states with and without suggestion text.
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21276
Summary: Ref T13513. Introduce a formal server-side content state object so the whole state can be saved and restored to the drafts table, read from the request, etc.
Test Plan: Created and edited inlines. Reloaded drafts with edits. Submitted normal and editing comments. Grepped for affected symbols.
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21275
Summary:
Ref T13513. Currently, all the inline code passes around strings to describe content. I plan to add background music, animation effects, etc., soon. To prepare for this change, make content a state object.
This does not change any user-visible behavior, it just prepares for content to become more complicated than a single string.
Test Plan: Created, edited, submitted, cancelled, etc., comments.
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21273
Summary:
Ref T13513. When a user selects a text range and uses "New Inline Comment" to create a comment directly from a range, store the offset information alongside the comment.
When hovering the comment, highlight the original range.
Test Plan: {F7480926, size=full}
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21250
Summary:
Ref T13513. As part of inline metadata, save the document engine the change is being rendered with.
This will allow other parts of the UI to detect that an inline was created on a Jupyter notebook but is being rendered on raw source, or whatever else.
The immediate goal is to fix nonsensical inline snippet rendering in email on Jupyter notebooks.
Test Plan:
- Created inlines and replies on normal soure code, saw no document engine annotated in the database.
- Created inlines and replies on a Jupyter notebook rendered in Jupyter mode, saw "jupyter" annotations in the database.
- Swapped document engines between Jupyter and Source, etc.
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21240
Summary:
Ref T13513. As users type text into inline comments, save the comment state as a draft on the server.
This has some rough edges, particularly around previews, but mostly works. See T13513 for notes.
Test Plan: Started an inline, typed some text, waited a second, reloaded the page, saw an editing inline with the saved text.
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21216
Summary:
Ref T13513. This is mostly an infrastructure cleanup change.
In a perfect world, this would be a series of several changes, but they're tightly interconnected and don't have an obvious clean, nontrivial partition (or, at least, I don't see one). Followup changes will exercise this code repeatedly and all of these individual mutations are "obviously good", so I'm not too worried about the breadth of this change.
---
Inline comments are stored as transaction comments in the `PhabricatorAuditTransactionComment` and `DifferentialTransactionComment` classes.
On top of these two storage classes sit `PhabricatorAuditInlineComment` and `DifferentialInlineComment`. Historically, these were an indirection layer over significantly different storage classes, but nowadays both storage classes look pretty similar and most of the logic is actually the same. Prior to this change, these two classes were about 80% copy/pastes of one another.
Part of the reason they're so copy/pastey is that they implement a parent `Interface`. They are the only classes which implement this interface, and the interface does not provide any correctness guarantees (the storage objects are not actually constrained by it).
To simplify this:
- Make `PhabricatorInlineCommentInterface` an abstract base class instead.
- Lift as much code out of the `Audit` and `Differential` subclasses as possible.
- Delete methods which no longer have callers, or have only trivial callers.
---
Inline comments have two `View` rendering classes, `DetailView` and `EditView`. They share very little code.
Partly, this is because `EditView` does not take an `$inline` object. Historically, it needed to be able to operate on inlines that did not have an ID yet, and even further back in history this was probably just an outgrowth of a simple `<form />`.
These classes can be significantly simplified by passing an `$inline` to the `EditView`, instead of individually setting all the properties on the `View` itself. This allows the `DetailView` and `EditView` classes to share a lot of code.
The `EditView` can not fully render its content. Move the content rendering code into the view.
---
Prior to this change, some operations need to work on inlines that don't have an inline ID yet (we assign an ID the first time you "Save" a comment). Since "editing" comments will now be saved, we can instead create a row immediately.
This means that all the inline code can always rely on having a valid ID to work with, even if that ID corresponds to an empty, draft, "isEditing" comment. This simplifies more code in `EditView` and allows the "create" and "reply" code to be merged in `PhabricatorInlineCommentController`.
---
Client-side inline events are currently handled through a mixture of `ChangesetList` listeners (good) and ad-hoc row-level listeners (less good). In particular, the "save", "cancel", and "undo" events are row-level. All other events are list-level.
Move all events to list-level. This is supported by all inlines now having an ID at all stages of their lifecycle.
This allows some of the client behavior to be simplified. It currently depends on binding complex ad-hoc dictionaries into event handlers in `_drawRows()`, but it seems like almost all of this code can be removed. In fact, no more than one row ever seems to be drawn, so this code can probably be simplified further.
---
Finally, save an "isEditing" state. When we rebuild a revision on the client, click the "edit" button if it's in this state. This is a little hacky, but simpler to get into a stable state, since the row layout of an inline depends on a "view row" followed by an "edit row".
Test Plan:
- Created comments on either side of a diff.
- Edited a comment, reloaded, saw edit stick.
- Saved comments, reloaded, saw save stick.
- Edited a comment, typed text, cancelled, "unedited" to get state back.
- Created a comment, typed text, cancelled, "unedited" to get state back.
- Deleted a comment, "undeleted" to get state back.
Weirdness / known issues:
- Drafts don't autosave yet.
- Fixed in D21187:
- When you create an empty comment then reload, you get an empty editor. This is a bit silly.
- "Cancel" does not save state, but should, once drafts autosave.
- Mostly fixed in D21188:
- "Editing" comments aren't handled specially by the overall submission flow.
- "Editing" comments submitted in that state try to edit themselves again on load, which doesn't work.
Subscribers: jmeador
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21186
