Summary:
Ref T2222. Differential has certain "words of power" (like `Ref T123` or `Depends on D345`) which should expand into a separate transaction when they appear anywhere in text.
Currently, they're respected in only some fields. I'm expanding them to work in any remarkup field, including comments and inline comments.
This partially generalizes transaction expansion/extraction in comments. Eventually, I'll probably implement some very soft sort of reference edge for T4036, maybe.
Test Plan: {F119368}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8369
Summary: Ref T2222. This should help new mail thread properly with old mail.
Test Plan: Will push.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8367
Summary: Ref T2222. This will probabaly have a few rough edges too, but seems to work well.
Test Plan:
- Made a bunch of comments while building this.
- Made some new comments.
- Verified that the Asana/JIRA integration is only a little bit janky, not completely broken.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8362
Summary: Ref T2222. Ref T3886. Differential has a legacy storage table for auxiliary fields; move the data to modern storage.
Test Plan:
- Ran migration.
- Verified fields still worked properly afterward (view, edit, etc).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3886, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8355
Summary: Ref T2222. This enriches mail a little bit to get these rendering pretty much like they do now.
Test Plan: {F118255}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8343
Summary:
Ref T2222. This requires one new trick:
- When merging edge transactions which both add/update an edge, the Editor gets to control how the edge data is merged.
Specifically, we pick the "strongest" state to keep, so "accept + comment" leaves you with an accept instead of a comment.
Test Plan: Accepted, commented on, and comment + accepted revisions. Added some debugging dumps to verify that the merging was getting hit and working correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8340
Summary:
Ref T2222. This doesn't feel super clean, but doesn't feel too bad either.
Basically, Differential transactions can have secondary state-based effects (changing the overall revision status) when reviewers resign, are removed, accept, or reject revisions.
To deal with this in ApplicationTransactions, I did this:
- `applyFinalEffects()` can now alter the transaction set (notably, add new ones). This mostly matters for email, notifications and feed.
- In Differential, check for an overall revision state transition in `applyFinalEffects()` (e.g., your reject moving the revision to a rejected state).
- I'm only writing the transaction if the transition is implied and indirect.
- For example, if you "Plan Changes", that action changes the state on its own so there's no implicit state change transaction added.
The transactions themselves are kind of fluff, but it seems useful to keep a record of when state changes occurred in the transaction log. If people complain we can hide/remove them.
Test Plan: {F118143}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8339
Summary: Ref T2222. This mostly makes Accept/Reject work. The big missing piece is that overall revision status does not yet update properly. I need to think about how I want that to work a little bit more.
Test Plan: Accepted and rejected some stuff.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8333
Summary: Ref T2222. This is obsolete and no longer used. We could deduce it from transactions or commits in modern Phabricator if we wanted it. We may implement a more general mechanism for T4434.
Test Plan: `grep`
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8330
Summary:
Ref T2222. This introduces two small new concepts:
- `expandTransactions()`: allows a transaction to expand into several transactions. For example, "resign" adds a "remove reviewers" transaction.
- We have some other cases which could use this, but currently hard-code things outside of the `Editor`.
- One example is that in Maniphest, closing a task implies claiming it if it is unowned.
- `setIgnoreOnNoEffect()`: The whole Editor can be set to continue or stop if any transactions have no effect, but this allows the behavior to be refined at the individual transaction level. This is primarily to make the UX less confusing, so the user gets only a single relevant error instead of one for each expanded transaction.
Otherwise, this is pretty straightforward.
Test Plan:
Rigged comment form to use SavePro controller, enabled resign action, then tried to resign from a bunch of stuff.
{F117743}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8328
Summary: Ref T2222. Implements the simpler actions (abandon, reclaim, close, reopen, plan changes, request review) in a transactional way with validation and effect checks.
Test Plan:
- Rigged submissions to point at the Pro controller.
- Rigged dropdown to have all these options all the time.
- Tried to apply about 20-30 of these operations to various revisions and always got the expected result (success, error, or no-op).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8307
Summary: Ref T2222. Makes the "pro" controller work with inlines.
Test Plan: Added a bunch of inlines and saved them with the "pro" controller.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8306
Summary: Ref T2222. Adds a mostly-functional "Pro" comment controller. This does the core stuff, but does not yet do actions (accept, reject, etc.) or inline comments.
Test Plan: Changed the `if (false)` to an `if (true)`, then made some comments, etc. This is normally unreachable.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8304
Summary: Ref T2222. Adds basic support for email.
Test Plan: Received an email via `/editpro/`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8303
Summary: Ref T3886. Now that a custom field can emit a core transaction, just emit a subscribers transaction.
Test Plan: {F116014}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3886
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8289
Summary:
Ref T3886. Ref T418.
- Adds "View Policy" and "Edit Policy" fields.
- Allows CustomFields to produce arbitrary types of transactions, so these fields can produce standard view/edit policy transactions and get all the strings and validation associated with them.
Test Plan: {F116001}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T418, T3886
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8287
Summary: Ref T2222. Ref T1790. I partially modernized this recently, but bring it to the mail version too.
Test Plan: See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: zeeg, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1790, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8294
Summary:
Ref T3886. I spent a few hours trying to make `DifferentialFieldSpecification` extend `PhabricatorCustomField` so I could be more blunt in my approach here and just swap the whole thing over in one go (more or less like I did with Maniphest) but we have a ton of custom fields and things felt really shaky and the change was enormous and hard to keep track of.
Instead, I'm going to do this more gradually and go field-by-field. This implements a CustomField version of the "Title" field.
(There are no links to this in the UI.)
Test Plan:
{F115353}
{F115354}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3886
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8276
Summary: Ref T2222. Restore this funky is-visible / inline-is-elsewhere logic.
Test Plan: Updated a revision, saw all the inlines render properly when looking at various diffs and versus-diffs. Clicked inline links.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8224
Summary: Ref T2222. On the `tmp.differential` branch, we're currently having
issues parsing commits which reference Differential revisions, because the
"user closed this revision (closed by commit xyz)" message is fataling:
[2014-02-13 14:12:36] EXCEPTION: (PhutilProxyException) Error while
executing task ID 345358 from queue. {>} (AphrontQueryException)
#1048: Column 'contentSource' cannot be null
Specifically, the MessageParser pathway for CommentEditor doesn't set a content
source. Make sure CommentEditor always sets a content source.
(This is also causing a buildup of diffs on D8212 and D8211.)
Auditors: btrahan
Summary:
Ref T2222. This is the big one.
This migrates each `DifferentialComment` to one or more ApplicationTransactions (action, cc, reviewers, update, comment, inlines), and makes `DifferentialComment` a double-reader for ApplicationTransactions.
The migration is pretty straightforward:
- If a comment took an action not otherwise covered, it gets an "action" transaction. This is something like "epriestley abandoned this revision.".
- If a comment updated the diff, it gets an "updated diff" transaction. Very old transactions of this type may not have a diff ID (probably only at Facebook).
- If a comment added or removed reviewers, it gets a "changed reviewers" transaction.
- If a comment added CCs, it gets a "subscribers" transaction.
- If a comment added comment text, it gets a "comment" transaction.
- For each inline attached to a comment, we generate an "inline" transaction.
Most comments generate a small number of transactions, but a few generate a significant number.
At HEAD, the code is basically already doing this, so comments in the last day or two already obey these rules, roughly, and will all generate only one transaction (except inlines).
Because we've already preallocated PHIDs in the comment text table, we only need to write to the transaction table.
NOTE: This significantly degrades Differential, making inline comments pretty much useless (they each get their own transaction, and don't show line numbers or files). The data is all fine, but the UI is garbage now. This needs to be fixed before we can deploy this to users, but it's easily separable since it's all just display code.
Specifically, they look like this:
{F112270}
Test Plan:
I've migrated locally and put things through their paces, but it's hard to catch sketchy stuff locally because most of my test data is nonsense and bad migrations wouldn't necessarily look out of place.
IMPORTANT: I'm planning to push this to a branch and then shift production over to the branch, and run it for a day or two before bringing it to master.
I generally feel good about this change: it's not that big since we were able to separate a lot of pieces out of it, and it's pretty straightforward. That said, it's still one of the most scary/dangerous changes we've ever made.
Reviewers: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8210
Summary:
Ref T2222. Ref T4415. We're still writing Differential subscription stuff into this weird legacy `differential_relationship` table, which is like an edge table but extremely ancient.
Move it into a proper table.
I've removed `withSubscriptions()` from `DifferentialRevisionQuery`. It was weird, doesn't work consistently with other similar filters, and was only used by the API. Now it means "ccs", which is consistent with the ApplicationSearch UI and with Maniphest.
Test Plan:
Without migrating, added and removed subscribers via various workflows. Queried for subscribers. Everything worked as expected.
Ran the migration, verified data survived.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: FacebookPOC, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222, T4415
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8202
Summary:
See D8200. Ref T2222. Instead of writing one comment which can have a ton of different effects, write a series of one-effect comments. These will be easier to convert into ApplicationTransactions.
This has a minor user-facing effect of making these multiple-action comments render separately:
{F111919}
Once the migration completes, they should automatically merge together nicely again.
Test Plan: Made a bunch of comments and took a bunch of actions, all of which worked normally except that they rendered as several things instead of just one.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, FacebookPOC
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8201
Summary:
Ref T2222. Instead of writing one comment which performs both a diff update and adds a comment, write two comments, one for each action. These will translate directly into ApplicationTransactions writes.
This has a small impact on the UX: these updates now render in two rows, instead of one. After T2222, they'll automerge back together.
{F111909}
Test Plan: Updated a revision.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8200
Summary:
Ref T2222. Currently, one `DifferentialComment` can do a lot of things (add ccs, reviewers, comments, inline comments, and perform state changes). In the future, each `ApplicationTransaction` does only one thing. This is the primary piece of complexity which makes the upcoming migration risky, because each comment needs to migrate into multiple transactions.
I want to mitigate this complexity as much as possible before the migration itself happens. One approach I'm going to use to do that is to start writing one comment per effect now, so the mapping is more direct when the migration itself happens and the write code can be straightforward (one row per save()) after the migration.
This tackles a small piece of that, which is the mail Differential sends. Currently, Differential mail acts on a single comment. Instead, allow it to act on a list of comments, but always give it one comment for now. In the future, we can hand it several comments instead and still get the expected behavior.
This change should have no impact on any application behaviors.
Test Plan:
- Commented;
- commented with inline;
- added reviewers;
- added CCs;
- added CCs via mentions;
- updated revision;
- looked at all the mail, all of which seemed sane.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8199
Summary: ...and surface it in all adapters except commit adapters. Values are true or false. Ref T4294
Test Plan: made a herald rule to be cc'd on new tasks. was cc'd on new tasks and not cc'd on updates to existing tasks.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4294
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8142
Summary: Fixes T3857. Earlier work made this trivial and just left product questions, which I've answered by requiring the daemons to run on reasonable installs.
Test Plan: Ran `bin/search index` and `bin/search index --background`. Observed indexes write in the former case and tasks queue in the latter case. Commented with a unique string on a revision and searched for it a moment later, got exactly one result (that revision), verifying that reindexing works correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3857
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7966
Summary:
Depends on D7500.
This seemed like a pretty good idea once I thought of it. Instead of having some custom triggering logic instead Harbormaster, I figured it best to leverage all of Herald's power so that users can create rules to apply builds to commits and differential revisions. This gives the added advantage that they can trigger off builds for particular types of revisions and commits, which seems like it could be really useful (e.g. run extra tests against revisions that touch sensitive areas of the code).
Test Plan: Ran the usual daemons + the Harbormaster daemon. Pushed a commit to the repository and saw both the buildable and build get created when the commit worked picked it up. Submitted a diff and saw both the buildable and build get created when the Herald rules were evaluated for the diff.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran, hwinkel
Maniphest Tasks: T1049
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7501
Summary:
Ref T2222. Shrink the API to make it easier to move this object's storage to ApplicationTransactions.
Fixes T3415. This moves the "Summary" and "Test Plan" into the property list, and thereby fixes all the attribution problems associated with commandeering, creating a revision from another user's diff, etc.
Test Plan: Browsed several revisions.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3415, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7375
Summary: Ref T1279. The new stuff seems stable, so stop writes to the old tables.
Test Plan:
- Added and removed reviewers.
- Grepped for `::RELATIONSHIP_TABLE` to verify we really have no more reads.
- Grepped for `::RELATION_REVIEWER`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7360
Summary:
Ref T603. Allows the Differential view policy to be configured with a default.
I've omitted "edit" because I want to wait and see how comment/comment-action policies work out. I could imagine locking "edit" down to only the owner at some point, and providing a wider "interact" capability, or something like that, which would cover accept/reject/commandeer. Users in this group could still edit indirectly by commandeering first.
Test Plan: Created new revisions from the CLI and conduit.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7269
Summary:
Ref T1279. This is a logical change.
- "Reject" (nee "Request Changes") is now sticky. The review won't transition to "Accepted" until the reviewer clears their objection. In practice, I think it always worked like this anyway (without technical enforcement, users just followed this rule naturally, since disobeying this rule is kind of a dick move) so I don't expect this to change much. I think this rule is easier to understand than the old rule now, given the multi-reviewer status and blocking reviewers.
- "Blocking Reviewer" and "Reject" now prevent a revision from transitioning to "Accepted". When reviewers accept, resign, or are removed, we do a check to see if the reivsion has: at least one user reviewer who has accepted; zero rejects; and zero blocks. If all conditions are satisfied, we transition it to "accepted".
Practically, the primary net effect of this is just to make blocking reviews actually block.
This is pretty messy, but there's not much we can do about it until after T2222, since we have two completely separate editor pathways which are both responsible for adjusting status. Eventually, these can merge into a single sane editor which implements reasonable rules in reaonable ways. But that day is not today.
Test Plan: With three users and a project, made a bunch of accepts, rejects, resigns and reviewer removals. I think I probably covered most of the pathways? There are a lot of interactions here.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, wisutsak.jaisue.7
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7245
Summary: Ref T1279. These reviewers don't actually create a logical block yet (that is, revisions still transition to "accepted" even in their presence), but this handles everything except that.
Test Plan: Added Herald rules and updated revisions; see screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7244
Summary:
Ref T1279. With the new per-reviewer status, you can always accept or reject a revision.
This is primarily cosmetic/UI changes. In particular, you've always been able to reject a rejected revision, the UI just didn't show you an option.
Test Plan: Accepted accepted revisions; rejected rejected revisions. See screenshots.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7243
Summary: Ref T1279. If you accept a revision, also accept on behalf of all the projects you have authority to accept for.
Test Plan:
- Accepted a revision which I was a reviewer on, saw my own status and an authority project's status change to "Accepted".
- Accepted a revision which I was not a reviewer on, saw my own status be added (as "Accepted") and the project's status update.
Also, see screenshot.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, wisutsak.jaisue.7
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7242
Summary:
Ref T1279. Although I think this is a bad idea in general (we once supported it, removed it, and seemed better off for it) users expect it to exist and want it to be available. Give them enough rope to shoot themselves in the foot.
I will probably write some lengthy treatise on how you shouldn't use this rule later.
Implementation is straightforward because Differential previously supported this rule.
This rule can also be used to add project reviewers.
Test Plan: Made some "add reviewers" rules, created revisions, saw reviewers trigger.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7235
Summary: Ref T1279. Updates status to 'accepted' or 'commented' when the user takes those actions.
Test Plan:
- Commented on a revision, got a comment icon.
- Accepted a revision, got an accept icon.
- Commented again, icon stayed as "accept".
- Faked the "old diff" states.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7229
Summary:
Ref T603. When a diff is attached to a revision, try to guess the repository if possible. In cases where we succeed, this automatically gives us intuitive policy behavior (i.e., you can see a revision if you can see the repository the change is against).
I pulled this into a funky little "Lookup" class for two reasons:
- It's used in two places;
- I anticipate that we might need to add some sort of `explainWhy()` method if users find the heuristics confusing.
Test Plan: Created and updated revisions, saw them pick up the correct repository association. Ran Herald dry run against associable and nonassociable revisions, saw correct values populate.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7147
Summary:
Currently, these events don't fire for Conduit updates, which makes them sort of silly.
This will get proper treatment after T2222.
Test Plan: Installed a `throw new Exception(...)` event listener. Performed Conduit and web updates of revisions, saw event listener fire.
Reviewers: btrahan, guywarner
Reviewed By: guywarner
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7004
Summary: Ref T603. Killing this class is cool because the classes that replace it are policy-aware. Tried to keep my wits about me as I did this and fixed a few random things along the way. (Ones I remember right now are pulling a query outside of a foreach loop in Releeph and fixing the text in UIExample to note that the ace of hearts if "a powerful" card and not the "most powerful" card (Q of spades gets that honor IMO))
Test Plan: tested the first few changes (execute, executeOne X handle, object) then got real mechanical / careful with the other changes.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, aran, FacebookPOC
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6941
Summary: Ref T2852. Bleh, gross. Does what it says in the title.
Test Plan: {F54024}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2852
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6735
Summary:
Ref T2769. Get content types out of hard-coded config and into dynamic adapters.
This removes the "MERGE" and "OWNERS" content types, which were vestigal. These needs are likely better addressed through subscriptions/transactions, and are obsolete, and haven't existed for 2+ years and no one has asked for them to be restored.
Test Plan: Mostly a bunch of grep. Viewed rule list, rule edit. Edited a revision.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2769
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6656
Summary: One place used status, other used state. Killed state in favor of status.
Test Plan: None at all
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6422
Summary:
Keep track of the state of a reviewer in an edge between reviewer and revision.
The edge stores the state of the review, added or rejected. And if the revision was
accepted by that reviewer the id of the diff accepted.
Test Plan:
Create diffs and clowncopterize reviewer list changes. This includes:
* Adding new reviewers
* Resigning
* Commandering a revision
Reviewers: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T1279
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6372
Conflicts:
src/applications/differential/editor/DifferentialCommentEditor.php
Summary:
1. Show add reviewer typehead when user selects resign as a reviewer.
2. Change the label for add reviewers typehead when user selects resign as a reviewer.
Test Plan:
1. Add yourself as a reviewer in a diff.
2. Select "Resign as Reviewer" in comment editor.
Add reviewer typehead should display, with label "Suggest Another Reviewer".
Add reviewer typehead is also displayed after user refreshed the page with "Resign as Reviewer"
selected.
Reviewers: wez, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, epriestley, akramer, person
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6340
Summary:
Ref T2222. See D6260.
Push all this junk behind a Query so I can move the storage out from underneath it.
Test Plan: Viewed home page, list view, revision. Made draft, looked at preview, submitted draft, viewed inline, replied to inline.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6262
Summary:
This was mentioned in T2928 and nobody objected.
It just references the task instead of fixing it as that would be too aggressive.
It also doesn't check assignee of the task (by purpose).
Test Plan: Created diff from a branch named T2928.
Reviewers: epriestley, edward
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T2928
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5640
Summary: Added constants to PhabricatorEventType. Modified DifferentialRevisionEditor and DifferentialCommentEditor.
Test Plan:
Created a revision. Edited and made a comment on that revision. It's updating as usual. I think nothing broke may be it's working.
Let me know if I have done it correclty.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin, AnhNhan
Maniphest Tasks: T2899
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5869
Summary:
Unmuck almost all of the we-sort-of-have-viewers-some-of-the-time mess.
There are a few notable cases here:
- I used Omnipotent users when indexing objects for search. I think this is correct; we do policy filtering when showing results.
- I cheated in a bad way in the Remarkup object rule, but fixing this requires fixing all the PhabricatorRemarkupEngine callsites (there are 85). I'll do that in the next diff.
- I cheated in a few random places, like when sending mail about package edits. These aren't a big deal.
Test Plan:
- Grepped for all PhabricatorObjectHandleData references.
- Gave them viewers.
Reviewers: vrana
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran, edward
Maniphest Tasks: T603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5151
Test Plan: Ran the migration on a single revision, verified DB, called `loadUnsubscribedPHIDs()`.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4786
Summary: Fixes various array_combine() warnings for PHP < 5.4
Test Plan: lint/unit/grep
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4660
Summary:
T2345
getConfig throws an Exception when the key does not exist.
Also removes dead code that throws an Exception.
Test Plan:
Reloaded the Phabricator home page. In the process, found
2 Exceptions thrown due to nonexistent keys. After addressing these problems,
the home page loads without Exceptions.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4541
Summary: Fixes T2316
Test Plan:
When the config file allows reopening,
navigate to a closed revision and reopen it in the user interface,
and verify that the revision now "needs review."
Also checks that the reopen option is unavailable when disallowed
by the config file.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T2316
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4526
Summary:
The search indexing API has several problems right now:
- Always runs in-process.
- It would be nice to push this into the task queue for performance. However, the API currently passses an object all the way through (and some indexers depend on preloaded object attributes), so it can't be dumped into the task queue at any stage since we can't serialize it.
- Being able to use the task queue will also make rebuilding indexes faster.
- Instead, make the API phid-oriented.
- No uniform indexing API.
- Each "Editor" currently calls SomeCustomIndexer::indexThing(). This won't work with AbstractTransactions. The API is also just weird.
- Instead, provide a uniform API.
- No uniform CLI.
- We have `scripts/search/reindex_everything.php`, but it doesn't actually index everything. Each new document type needs to be separately added to it, leading to stuff like D3839. Third-party applications can't provide indexers.
- Instead, let indexers expose documents for indexing.
- Not application-oriented.
- All the indexers live in search/ right now, which isn't the right organization in an application-orietned view of the world.
- Instead, move indexers to applications and load them with SymbolLoader.
Test Plan:
- `bin/search index`
- Indexed one revision, one task.
- Indexed `--type TASK`, `--type DREV`, etc., for all types.
- Indexed `--all`.
- Added the word "saboteur" to a revision, task, wiki page, and question and then searched for it.
- Creating users is a pain; searched for a user after indexing.
- Creating commits is a pain; searched for a commit after indexing.
- Mocks aren't currently loadable in the result view, so their indexing is moot.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: 20after4, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1991, T2104
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4261
Summary:
Users are used to this feature from comments.
Provide it also in title, summary and test plan.
It adds the users to CC only on creating the revision to avoid cases like:
"I mentioned this user but now I want to remove him from CC" or he unsubscribes.
Test Plan: Wrote `@epriestley` to summary.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4050
Summary: It is used by 'Pending Differential Revisions'.
Test Plan: Created a new file, `arc diff`, looked at this path in Diffusion, saw Pending Differential Revisions.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3991
Summary:
This commit doesn't change license of any file. It just makes the license implicit (inherited from LICENSE file in the root directory).
We are removing the headers for these reasons:
- It wastes space in editors, less code is visible in editor upon opening a file.
- It brings noise to diff of the first change of any file every year.
- It confuses Git file copy detection when creating small files.
- We don't have an explicit license header in other files (JS, CSS, images, documentation).
- Using license header in every file is not obligatory: http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new.
This change is approved by Alma Chao (Lead Open Source and IP Counsel at Facebook).
Test Plan: Verified that the license survived only in LICENSE file and that it didn't modify externals.
Reviewers: epriestley, davidrecordon
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T2035
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3886
Summary: See D3789. Same thing for Differential.
Test Plan: Created a new revision and made a comment. Verified reviewer got popup notifications but the in-app notifications were delivered already marked as read.
Reviewers: vrana, btrahan
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1403
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3790
Summary: This allows users to add a revision's author as reviewer according Differential configuration using the 'Leap Into Action' form.
Test Plan: Tested on local install.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T1885
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3682
Summary: `actorPHID` no longer gets set or exists.
Test Plan: Updated a revision without fataling.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3684
Summary: When we receive an email, figure out if any of the other tos and ccs are users. If they are, pass their phids through the stach as "exclude phids" and exclude them from getting the email.
Test Plan: used the various applications (audit, differential, maniphest) and noted emails were sent as expected.
Reviewers: epriestley, vrana
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran, Korvin, vrana
Maniphest Tasks: T1676
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3645
Summary: this is useful for certain workflows, typically where the reviewer is a gatekeeper of sorts who does the acutal commit. Special thanks to D2900 which made this relatively brain-dead to code up.
Test Plan: set to "true" in my local development environment and verified test user "xerxes" could close my stuff
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T1732
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3398
Summary: See T1677. I think wanting bots to be able to post comments without sending email is a pretty reasonable use case. Eventually we should probably support this more broadly and maybe protect it with permissions (normal users maybe shouldn't be able to do this?) but we can wait for use cases.
Test Plan: Made comments with and without "silent". Verified that the non-silent comment sent email, and the silent comment did not.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1677
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D3341
Summary: This is a minor quality-of-life improvement to prevent D2968 from being as nasty as it is.
Test Plan: Ran unit tests; generated Differential, Maniphest and Diffusion emails and verified the bodies looked sensible.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T931
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2986
Summary: Did exactly what @epriestley suggested in T1428#2.
Test Plan: Turn it on in your config, post a revision, accept it. Turn it off in your config, post a revision, can't accept it.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2900
Summary: When the commandeerer was a reviewer, after the commandeering, he stayed as a reviewer. He can no longer amend the diff. He has to go 'Edit Revision' to remove himself/herself. The fix is to remove it automatically.
Test Plan:
comamndeereded a revision and the behavior is correct now:
- I was removed from the revision list
- the comment transaction shows one more entry that I removed myself as a reviewer
Reviewers: epriestley, vrana
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: nh, vrana, aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T1225
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2872
Summary: The notification implementation has been extended to Differential. Appropriate changes have been made to the Differential editors and Differential feed story.
Test Plan: Tested out various actions available for Differential and confirmed that the notifications get delivered correctly and feed is generated.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: allenjohnashton, ddfisher, aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2696
Summary:
- `kill_init.php` said "Moving 1000 files" - I hope that this is not some limit in `FileFinder`.
- [src/infrastructure/celerity] `git mv utils.php map.php; git mv api/utils.php api.php`
- Comment `phutil_libraries` in `.arcconfig` and run `arc liberate`.
NOTE: `arc diff` timed out so I'm pushing it without review.
Test Plan:
/D1234
Browsed around, especially in `applications/repository/worker/commitchangeparser` and `applications/` in general.
Auditors: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T1103
Summary: We had a real issue where revision was marked as accepted but the comment wasn't saved.
Test Plan: Reclaim abandoned revision.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: jungejason, aran, Koolvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2463
Summary: "Committed" is SVN-specific language, and confusing in Git and Mercurial. Use neutral language instead.
Test Plan: Inspection.
Reviewers: btrahan, Makinde, vrana, jungejason
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T909
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2087
Summary:
This is slightly more complicated for this reason:
- We don't set `dateCommitted` for normal commits, only for markcommitted.
-- We need to add this date to old revisions now.
Test Plan:
Reparse a revision - commit date was set.
Conduit `markcommitted` - commit date was set.
Run SQL script.
Display closed revision.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Koolvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2282
Summary:
- Adds "Commandeer Revision", to allow you to plunder revisions from those lost to sea (e.g., interns who have left or co-workers who are dealing with a family emergency).
- Removes admin-abandon to simplify things, since you can just Commandeer + Abandon now.
- There are other workarounds available but this is the natural/expected workflow (and the one everyone always asks for) and there's no real reason not to allow it.
Test Plan: Swashbuckled.
Reviewers: cpiro, btrahan, vrana, jungejason
Reviewed By: cpiro
CC: aran, zeeg
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2257
Summary:
- We currently post-filter by branches, but should do this in SQL. See T799.
- We currently identify branch-name-matches as being in the working copy even if they belong to a different project (e.g., two different projects with commits on the branch "master"). See T1100.
- Denormalize branch and project information into DifferentialRevision.
- Expose project information in the API.
Test Plan: Ran conduit API queries with branches and arc project IDs, got reasonable results.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana, jungejason
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1100, T799
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2190
Summary: NOTE: This is not produced by a script so there might be errors. Please review carefully.
Test Plan: Browse around Differential.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2103
Summary: NOTE: This is not produced by a script so there might be errors. Please review carefully.
Test Plan: Browse around.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2091
Summary:
We'll incorrectly send CCWelcome mail to users who would be added as CCs but are blocked by the new "$dont_add" stuff, for
example when a revision is updated and the user has a Herald rule which triggers them getting CC'd. See D2057.
Potentially a better fix for this would be to have "addCCs" return a list of the CCs it actually added, rather than duplicating the
logic of removing CCs in two places. However, that's not trivial since it's just a wrapper around alterRelationships() which is nasty
and would need a more complicated return type. I think this whole thing will get a refactoring pass at some point -- I want to build a
more generic "associations"-like datastore and replace some of the ad-hoc associations with it. So maybe I can clean it up when that
happens. For now, this should fix the immediate problem.
Test Plan: Updated a revision, didn't get CC welcomed.
Reviewers: vrana, btrahan
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2072
Summary:
Herald rules are adding CC also for Author and Reviewer.
See also D1397.
I was considering also just don't displaying the extra CC but this is probably better.
There are still cases where there could be reviewer in CC (e.g. by making reviewer from CC or by direct edit) but I think it's not a big problem.
Beeing both Reviewer and CC can be actually useful (e.g. if you resign than you still are in CC) but it's not that useful to justify this:
Author: vrana
Reviewers: epriestley
CCs: vrana, epriestley
Test Plan: Comment on revision where I am author.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2057
Summary: This header allows recipients to distinguish between CCs generated by Herald and CCs generated by humans.
Test Plan: Created a Herald rule to add a bunch of CC's to every revision. Created a revision. Added some CCs manually. Verified that only manual CCs appeared in the "Explicit" header.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T808
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D2018
Summary: No big surprises here, delted the unused "DarkConsole" class.
Test Plan: Ran 'testEverythingImplemented' to verify I wasn't finalizing anything we extend.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T795
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1876
Summary:
More complicated updates deserves title and explanation.
This diff uses only the first line from comment in diff's description.
It also removes the truncating at 80 chars which looks as an error.
Test Plan:
var_dump(preg_replace('/\n.*/s', '', "abc"));
var_dump(preg_replace('/\n.*/s', '', "abc\ndef"));
var_dump(preg_replace('/\n.*/s', '', "abc\ndef"));
var_dump(preg_replace('/\n.*/s', '', "abc\ndef\nghi"));
var_dump(preg_replace('/\n.*/s', '', "\nabc")); // empty string
Display revision with 255 chars description in update history - it looks OK.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1812
Summary:
- Enforce proper workflow rules.
- Fix a derp-bug with patches.
Test Plan:
- Tried to mark a revision I didn't own.
- Tried to mark a revision already marked committed.
- Tried to mark a revision otherwise not accepted.
- Verified daemon can override workflow rules and mark from arbitrary states.
Reviewers: btrahan, Makinde
Reviewed By: Makinde
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T948
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1809
Summary: When a revision is accepted, allow users to manually mark it committed if there's a daemon/tracking problem. This shouldn't happen in most installs but we have less-robust support for Mercurial and some installs may not be fully configured.
Test Plan: Marked a revision committed.
Reviewers: btrahan, Makinde
Reviewed By: Makinde
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T948
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1808
Summary:
When a comments add reviewers or CCs, we just dump that sort of nastily into the
body. Put it in the header like Maniphest instead.
Also, record the diff associated with "update" actions and link to it (T871).
Test Plan: {F8546} {F8547}
Reviewers: btrahan, davidreuss
Reviewed By: davidreuss
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T871
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1659
Summary: It makes perfect sense to add more reviewers while requesting review.
Test Plan:
Request review. Verify that Add Reviewers field shows and works.
Add some reviewer. Verify that comment preview works.
Submit. Verify that reviewers are saved and displayed.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1473
Summary:
This doesn't cover every case exhaustively (see comments) but should cover like
98% of the practical cases.
This makes one workflow modification: willWriteRevision() was previously
guaranteed to have a revisionID / revisionPHID and no longer is. I verified that
no field implementations depend on this behavior. Fields which depend on IDs
should be using didWriteRevision() instead.
Test Plan: Inserted a "throw" into the middle of the transactions and created
revisions; they didn't orphan. Created revisions normally, they worked
correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan, nh
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T605
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1541
Summary: There are lots of callsites to $changeset->getFilename() so it seemed
easier to rename getFileName() to getFilename() even if it includes database
change. Plus I think that getFilename() is better.
Test Plan:
Alter database.
Open revision.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1437
Summary:
See T730 and the slightly-less-pretty version of this in D1398.
When a user takes an action in Differential that has no effect (for instance,
accepting an already-accepted revision), prompt them:
Action Has No Effect
You can not accept this revision because it has already been accepted.
Do you want to post the feedback anyway, as a normal comment?
[Cancel] [Post as Comment]
If they have no comment text, the dialog only says "Cancel".
I think this is probably the best way to balance all the concerns here -- it
might occasionally be a little annoying, but that should be rare, and it should
never be confusing (the current workflow is extremely confusing).
This also fixes the issue where you can add all sorts of CCs who are already
part of the revision, either explicitly or via mentions.
Test Plan:
Posted some has-effect and has-no-effect comments, made different
choices in the dialog, everything seems to work OK?
Reviewers: vrana, btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: vrana
CC: aran, vrana
Maniphest Tasks: T730
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1403
Summary:
Commenting on a diff causes adding the writer to the CCs. It doesn't make much
sense if the writer is author or reviewer who get all the copies anyway.
I've also moved the decision to DifferentialCommentEditor.
Test Plan:
Comment on a diff where I am author
Comment on a diff where I am reviewer
Comment on a diff where I am neither
Explicitely Add CCs where I am author
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: jungejason, aran, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1397
Summary: See T773 and the explanatory inline comment.
Test Plan: Made no-action comments and comments that did something (reject, plan
changes) to revisions. Saw them always jump to the top of the action list.
Reviewers: jungejason, simpkins, btrahan
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, jungejason
Maniphest Tasks: T773
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1386
