Summary: Ref T9979. This simplifies/standardizes the code a bit, but mostly gives us more consistent class names and structure.
Test Plan:
- Used `bin/search index --type ...` to index documents of every indexable type.
- Searched for documents by unique text, found them.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9979
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14842
Summary: Update fund for new merchant authority stuff.
Test Plan:
- Created a secret initiative.
- Could see related activity as merchant.
- Could not see it not-as-merchant.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11959
Summary: Fixes T6693.
Test Plan:
Made a bunch of comments on a diff with differential, being sure to leave inlines here and there. This reproduced the issue in T6693. With this patch this issue no longer reproduces!
Successfully "showed older changes" in Maniphest too.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6693
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10931
Summary: Ref T5835. Make fund stories publish to feed and send email.
Test Plan: Made edits, etc., saw them in feed and outbound email.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10677
Summary:
Ref T2787. Builds on D10649 by rebining existing objects (carts, charges, etc) to merchantPHIDs and providerPHIDs instead of an implicit global merchant and weird global artifacts (providerType / providerKey).
Basically:
- When you create something that users can pay for, you specify a merchant to control where the payment goes.
- Accounts are install-wide, but payment methods are bound to merchants. This seems to do a reasonable job of balancing usability and technical concerns.
- Replace a bunch of weird links between objects with standard PHIDs.
- Improve "add payment method" flow.
Test Plan: Went through the Fund flow with Stripe and WePay, funding an initiative.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2787
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10652
Summary:
Ref T1191.
- Adds definitions for missing keys and keys with wrong uniqueness. Generally, I defined these before fixing the key query to actually pull all keys and support uniqueness.
- Moves "key uniqueness" to note severity; this is fixable (probably?) and there are no remaining issues.
- Moves "Missing Key" to note severity; missing keys are fixable and all remaining missing keys are really missing (either missing edge keys, or missing PHID keys):
{F210089}
- Moves "Surplus Key" to note seveirty; surplus keys are fixable all remaining surplus keys are really surplus (duplicate key in Harbormaster, key on unused column in Worker):
{F210090}
Test Plan:
- Vetted missing/surplus/unique messages.
- 146 issues remaining.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T1191
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10590
Summary: Ref T1191. Nothing too exciting in these.
Test Plan: Saw more blue in UI.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T1191
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10521
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is still completely made up (no payment integration), but you can "back" an initiative, type a number in the box, and generate a database row. You can then seach for backers and things you've backed and such.
Notable changes:
- Renamed "FundBacking" to "FundBacker". The former name was sort of because you can back things multiple times, but stuff like `$backings` was just too weird.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Backed an initiative.
- Viewed that I became a backer.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10486
Summary:
Ref T5835. This is all pretty boilerplate, and does not interact with Phortune at all yet.
You can create "Initiatives", which have a title and description, and support most of the expected infrastructure (policies, transactions, mentions, edges, appsearch, remakrup, etc).
Only notable decisions:
- Initiatives have an explicit owner. I think it's good to have a single clearly-responsible user behind an initiative.
- I think that's it?
Test Plan:
- Created an initiative.
- Edited an initiative.
- Changed application policy defaults.
- Searched for initiatives.
- Subscribed to an initiative.
- Opened/closed an initiative.
- Used `I123` and `{I123}` in remarkup.
- Destroyed an initiative.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5835
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10481
