Summary: Fixes T7756. This is the last little stray bit, though finishing T7757 also helps this feature IMO.
Test Plan: said "ZXX is the best" in comment on DXX and saw proper mention transaction on ZXX
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7756
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12405
Summary: Ref T7803. Remove these in favor of more generalized paging and ordering.
Test Plan: Sorted and paged results in various applications.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7803
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12378
Summary: This call got renamed but I missed the callsite.
Test Plan: No more fatal when viewing a custom policy from a transaction history page.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad, Mnkras
Reviewed By: chad, Mnkras
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12337
Summary:
Fixes T7731. When a user writes a "Send me an email" rule, always try send them an email, even if their notification settings would normally downgrade it to a notification.
In particular, this is stronger than these downgrades:
- Downgrades due to "self actions";
- downgrades due to "mail tags".
Test Plan:
- Wrote various Herald rules with "Send me an email" rules.
- Used `bin/mail list-outbound` / `show-outbound` to vet generated mail.
- Mail reacted properly to a variety of conditions (disabled accounts, settings, "send me an email" rule, forced delivery).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7731
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12300
Summary: These arrays looks a little odd, most likely due to the autofix applied by `ArcanistXHPASTLinter::LINT_ARRAY_SEPARATOR`. See D12296 in which I attempt to improve the autocorrection from this linter rule.
Test Plan: N/A
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12281
Summary:
Ref T7199. This fully modularizes mail command handling in Maniphest.
I had to add a couple of minor not-totally-solid-feeling tricks to deal with the "create" case, but they feel not-too-bad, and a million times better than what came before.
Test Plan: Used all commands with `receive-test`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12240
Summary: Ref T7199. Everyone can have a mail command! You can have a mail command! You can have a mail command! Mail commands for everyone!
Test Plan: Used `bin/mail receive-test` to issue commands against files and pastes.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12238
Summary:
Ref T7199. Essentially all of the reply handlers now apply transactions to something which implements PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface.
We can share code between them by lifting this stuff into a superclass.
First, convert paste. Also rename `PasteMockMailReceiver` to `PasteMailReceiver` (this got mis-copied from Pholio at some point, I think).
Test Plan: Used `bin/mail receive-test` to send comments + `!unsubscribe` to pastes.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12236
Summary:
Ref T7199. Although this is useful for discovery, it's un-useful enough that we already have an option to disable it, and most applications do not provide any meaningful instructions.
Throwing it away makes it easier to move forward and lets us get rid of a config option.
This is becoming a more advanced/power-user feature anyway, and the new syntax will be significantly more complex and hard to explain with a one-liner. I'm currently thinking that I'll maybe make the "help" menu a dropdown and give it some options like:
+---+
| O |
+---+---------------------+
| Maniphest Documentation |
| Maniphest Email Actions |
+-------------------------+
Then you click the "Email Actions" thing and get a runtime-derived list of available options. Not sure if I'll actually build that, but I think we can fairly throw the in-mail instructions away even if we don't go in that specific direction.
Test Plan: Grepped for `replyHandlerInstructions`, got no hits.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12229
Summary:
Ref T7585. This implements everything specified, with a few caveats
- since rooms you have yet to join can't be viewed in the column yet, the column view has some bugs and isn't expected to work.
- the room you're looking at is just pre-pending to the top of the "recent" list
Test Plan: made a room that no one could join. verified when viewing that there was no comment ui. made a room that others could join. verified folks who had yet to join had a "join" button with an area for text. tried joining with / without message text and it worked in both cases
Reviewers: chad, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7585
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12149
Summary:
Ref T1460. Ref T6403. Replace `Diffusion::INLINEDONE` with `Transactions::INLINESTATE` and generalize things enough that we can lift it into core.
The next change will lift Differential's similar implementation into the core.
Also start implementing a fix for T6403, providing an alternate hook for optional builtin transactions.
Test Plan: Changed inline state in Diffusion.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6403, T1460
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12129
Summary:
Ref T2009. Ref T1460. The way Diffusion and Differential load inlines is horrible garbage right now:
- Differential does an ad-hoc query to get the PHIDs, then does a real load to policy check.
- Diffusion completely fakes things. In practice this is not a policy violation, but it's dangerous.
Make TransactionCommentQuery extensible so we can subclass it and get the query building correctly in the right Query layer.
Specifically, the Diffusion and Differential subclasses of this Query will add appropriate `withX()` methods to let us express the query in SQL.
Test Plan: Loaded, previewed, edited, and submitted inlines in Differential and Diffusion
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T2009, T1460
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12026
Summary: This ended up having a different signature; the discrepancy can cause a warning.
Test Plan: No more warning.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11971
Summary: The participant list can sometimes be `null`, which fails when we try to `array_fuse()` it.
Test Plan: Created a new thread cleanly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11969
Summary:
Ref T6516. Although this behavior is somewhat-arguable as desirable, I think it's less surprising and more consistent to disable mentions when a repository is publishing.
In particular, if you import a repository developed on another Phabricator install, this stops all the `T123` in commit messages from creating mentions on your unrelated `T123` tasks.
We already disable autoclose, so `Closes T123` and `Ref T123` already have no effect, but a bare `T123` would generate a mention. Likewise, `@epriestley` would generate a mention.
If you import such a repository and then update it periodically, updates will activate autoclose and publishing (if you didn't disable them), but presumably this will hit a couple of tasks and you'll go change the settings if you forgot.
At some point, we may have some kind of use case for separating the "publish" setting into a "publish" setting and a "this is a local repository" setting. For example, if you work at Widget Corp, want to import Phabricator locally, //and// want to write Herald rules against it, you can't currently configure the repository to let you do all of this. But we haven't actually seen a use case for this yet.
Test Plan:
- Pushed some commits with bare `T11`, saw mentions.
- Disabled publishing for the repository, pushed some commits with
- Imported a bunch of commits without seeing pipeline failures.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6516
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11966
Summary: Fixes T7232.
Test Plan: Saw "View Raw" gone for removed comment, still present and functional for non-removed comment.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7232
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11926
Summary: Ref T7094. I am not sure when this text is legitimately exposed to users - they should be getting an error about not being able to see the object before they get an error about not being able to see a given transaction... That said, I think this text is logically correct at least.
Test Plan: read the text
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7094
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11632
Summary:
Ref T7094. We should do a policy query on the files IMO because there exists a scenario where the file gets locked down directly. This requires being a bit more disciplined about setting user, which in turn requires deciding whether or not to show edit / reply links as a separate piece of logic, not conditional on user presence.
This is not the best code but I don't think it gets worse with this and is just some other nuance in any larger cleanup we take on someday.
Test Plan: looked at a revision and noted inline comments rendered correctly with reply / edit actions. looked at a diff standalone and noted no reply / edit actions as expected. looked at a "details" link on a transaction and it rendered correctly. looked at a diff in phriction of page edits and it looked good. grepped around and verified the remaining callsite in diffusion already has the setUser call.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7094
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11579
Summary: Fixes T6819. This isn't as useful as you might think and has one horribly buggy behavior - if you edit an object which has a description and a projects field, you can be unable to remove the associated project as the automagic association from the description kicks in. Further, since we've added the ability for applications to create multiple email addresses AND herald can react to those emails - say by programmatically adding projects - the known needs for this feature are basically 0. If this proves to be false we can maybe add some other syntax for these mentions - see T6819 for ideas / discussion.
Test Plan: removed a project from a maniphest task while still mentioning it in the description and it worked!
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6819
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11573
Summary: due to typehints, passing null is going to barf here. Ref D11564, ref T5039.
Test Plan: made an edit to a task from the web ui and it didnt fatal
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5039
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11571
Summary:
Fixes T5039. The trick / possibly lame part here is we only match 1 application email and its undefined which one. e.g. if a user emails us at address x, y, and z only one of those will pick up the mail. Ergo, don't let users define non-sensical herald conditions like "matches all". Also document what I think was non-intuitive about the code with an inline comment; we have to return an array with just a phid from an object and out of context it feels very "what the...???"
Note this needs to be deployed to other applications still, but I think its okay to close T5039 aggressively here since its done from a user story perspective.
Test Plan: set up a herald rule to flag tasks created as blue via app email x. sent an email to x via `bin/mail receive-test` and verified the task had the blue flag
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5039
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11564
Summary: Removes the 1x application icons, and uses the fonticons instead. Feed was only known location.
Test Plan:
feed, dashboards, grep for use
{F275636}
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: hach-que, Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11496
Summary: Fixes T6989. Basically return a nice dialogue like we do for "NoEffect" transactions. This is a little prettier than the other dialogue was. Also, stop adding TYPE_EDGE as a transaction type as we end up having it 2x, which then makes the error get validated 2x.
Test Plan: tried to add myself as a reviewer and got a nice error message.
Reviewers: chad, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6989
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11448
Summary: Ref T6962. Mainly accomplished by re-factoring the base editor `buildMailBody` function and then using it differently in the `DifferentialTransactionEditor`.
Test Plan: commented on a revision leaving inline feedback. inspected via bin/mail and it looked good! also made a maniphest comment and checked that email, which still looked good.
Reviewers: chad, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6962
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11402
Summary: Fixes T6895, When viewing comment edit history, user should not see a dropdown for each comment edit transaction.
Test Plan: Edit task comment, view comment edit history, comment transactions should not provide a dropdown with action items.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6895
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11355
Summary: Fixes T6594, Logged out users should be able to "View Raw" comments in public objects.
Test Plan: Log out, open maniphest task with comments, open dropdown associated with comment, click "View Raw", should be able to see raw comment.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6594
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11295
Summary:
Ref T3165. Builds a dedicated index for Conpherence to avoid scale/policy filtering concerns.
- This is pretty one-off but I think it's generally OK.
- There's no UI for it.
- `ConpherenceFulltextQuery` is very low-level. You would need to do another query on the PHIDs it returns to actually show anything to the user.
- The `previousTransactionPHID` is so you can load chat context efficiently. Specifically, if you want to show results like this:
> previous line of context
> **line of chat that matches the query**
> next line of context
...you can read the previous lines out of `previousTransactionPHID` directly, and the next lines by issuing one query with `WHERE previousTransactionPHID IN (...)`.
I'm not 100% sure this is useful, but it seemed like a reasonable thing to provide, since there's no way to query this efficiently otherwise and I figure a lot of chat might make way more sense with a couple of lines of context.
Test Plan:
- Indexed a thread manually (whole thing indexed).
- Indexed a thread by updating it (just the new comment indexed).
- Wrote a hacky test script and got reasonable-looking query results.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T3165
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11234
Summary: Modernize remaining edges to subclass `PhabricatorEdgeType`. Largely based on D11045.
Test Plan: Browsed around and performed various actions include subscribing, unsubscribing and watching.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11116
Summary:
Removes an unused PhabricatorFeedStory Parameter from all getTitleForFeed() and getApplicationTransactionTitleForFeed() functions.
Ref D11088 Ref T6545
Test Plan: ran all unit tests and viewed some dashboard feeds
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6545
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11146
Summary:
Ref T4411
I'm not quite sure if this is the right place for this as it will be difficult to provide proper user feedback of why we removed a particular subscriber.
Is the ApplicationTransactionEditor generally the right place to extract mentioned phids in comments?
On the other hand in some cases we cannot really give user feedback why a user was not subscribed (e.g.: commits & diffs)
Adding a diff to a repo where the user mentioned has no view permissions the subscriber is currently still added. Still would have to find where this is donet...
Any other places?
Unrelated: Is there any way to remove a subscriber from a commit/audit ?
Test Plan:
- Edited tasks with the mentioned user having view permissions to this specific task and without
- Raised concern with a commit and commented on the audit with the user having view permissions to the repo and without
- Added a commit to a repo with and without the mentioned user having permissions
- Mention a user in a task & commit comment with and without permissions
- Mentioning a user in a diff description & comments with and without permissions to the specific diff
Reviewers: chad, #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: chad, Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4411
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11049
Summary:
Shows a timeline of all modified settings Fixes T6545
Will show all settings (no pagination, should be not so difficult to add if needed but most installs won't have hundreds of settings changes)
I'm not happy by how the PhabricatorConfigTransaction object is instructed to render the config keys but i don't see any other reasonable way.
We could always show the keys though.
Test Plan: Changed settings and called the history page
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6545
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11088
Summary: These classes are named differently from other `PhabricatorEdgeType` subclasses. Rename them for consistency.
Test Plan: I would expect the linter to complain if I missed anything.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11112
Summary:
...except the transaction class itself, which still needs some knowledge of these transactions for older installs.
Ref T5245. T5604 and T5245 are now in a similar place -- there's an unknown set of bugs introduced from my changes and there's still old display code lying around with some old transactions in the database. I'll stomp out the bugs if / when they surface and data migration is up next.
This revision also adds a "TransactionPreviewString" method to the edge objects so that we can have a prettier "Bob edited associated projects." preview of this transaction.
Test Plan: added a project from task detail and saw correct preview throughout process with correct project added. bulk removed a project from some tasks. added a project from the edit details pane.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T5245
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11013
Summary:
There's a comma to the lower-left of my profile picture here:
{F248962}
This is on a page like https://secure.phabricator.com/F248948
What's happening is that some `render()` method is returning a valid result like `array($stuff, null)`. This is getting passed to JS as an array, which is implicitly `join()`'ing it into a string, adding a comma.
Instead, make sure we render these to strings on the server side before shipping them to the client.
Test Plan: No more comma on file previews.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10974
Summary: Fixes T6731. I don't really understand the intent behind the two view classes here, but to get this to work I need to pass yet more data to the lower-level class.
Test Plan: Viewed a task with many comments. Clicked "show older". Quoted everything I could. Verified for each quote that it quoted correctly, inlcuding linking to the prior transaction.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6731
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10973
Summary: Fixes T6727. Repro is: mention a task on another task, in a comment.
The inverse edge editor applying the "alincoln mentioned this in <other task>" transaction doesn't have enough data to execute Herald rules.
Just don't try to execute the rules, since they don't make much sesne from a product perspective and are tricky from a technical perspective.
Test Plan: Commented on `T1` with `T2` in comment body and a Herald rule that examines subscribers.
Reviewers: btrahan
NOTE: Cowboy committing this since any task mention fatals.
Summary: Fixes T6694. Ref T4712. Turns out the logic here was slightly incorrect; we don't want to use the id of the last thing we hid but rather the first thing we show. I had garbage test data ("asdsadsadsa", etc) I guess so I didn't notice this.
Test Plan: made a new task where user a and user b alternated 3 comments each, cooperatively numbering them from 1 - 20. as both users, showed older transactions. pre-patch the issue described in T6694 occurred and post patch I saw the entire counting sequence.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4712, T6694
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10933
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: Only necessary for edits, only bother if the comment version is greater than 1. Ref T6690. This is another way to fix T6690 -- this check will never run since you can't edit a conpherence comment -- **but** the fix already applied should happen too to future proof Conpherence.
Test Plan: made a comment on a diff - success. edited the comment and mentions were generated.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6690
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10928
Summary: Fixes T6648. We do some automagical hotness based on the text you enter in remarkup textareas - e.g. adding projects or mentioning other objects. Refine the code here so that even when just editing a comment we build these transactions and apply them.
Test Plan: edited a comment and noted new mentions and projects showed up appropriately...!
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6648
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10922
Summary:
Ref T4712. Thus far, it seems that most "non-standard" things can be done pretty easily in the controller. Aside from deploying, this diff had to fix a few bugs / missing implementations of stuff.
(Notably, PhabricatorAuthProviderConfig, HeraldRule, PhabricatorSlowvotePoll, and AlmanacNetwork needed to implement PhabricatorApplicationTransactionInterface, PhabricatorAuthAuthProviderPHIDType had to be added, and a rendering bug in transactions of type PhabricatorOAuth2AuthProvider had to be fixed.)
Test Plan: Almanac - looked at binding, device, network, and service view controllers and verified timeline displayed properly. Herald - looked at a rule and verified timeline. Slowvote - looked at a vote and verified timeline. Auth - looked at an auth provider (Facebook) and verified proper display of transactions within timeline.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4712
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10921
Summary: Ref T4712. This adds pagination. Future diffs will need to deploy `buildTransactionTimeline` everywhere and massage this stuff as necessary if we hit any special cases.
Test Plan: Set page size to "5" to make it need to paginate often. Verified proper transactions loaded in and the javascript actions worked.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4712
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10887
Summary: See <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T906>. This behavior is a bug; we should remove the button if the user can't use the application.
Test Plan:
- With Macro uninstalled, did these things verifying the button vanished:
- Sent a user a message.
- Edited a revision.
- Edited repository basic information.
- Edited an initiative.
- Edited a Harbormaster build step.
- Added task comments.
- Edited profile blurb.
- Edited blog description.
- Commented on Pholio mock.
- Uploaded Pholio image.
- Edited Phortune merchant.
- Edited Phriction document.
- Edited Ponder answer.
- Edited Ponder question.
- Edited Slowvote poll.
- Edited a comment.
- Reinstalled Macro and saw button come back.
- Used button to put silly text on a funny picture.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10900
Summary: Ref T1217, Add link to email preferences to email template
Test Plan: Add comment to object like Maniphest task, check that email has a footer with a link to email preferences.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T1217
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10883
Summary: Ref T6343, adding HTMLMailMode to remarkup, and most objects should now be processed and appear pretty in emails.
Test Plan: Add a comment to a Maniphest task containing a mention of an object like '{T1}' or 'T1'. Emails should show a styled version of the object similar to how the object looks in the context of the Maniphest task in the UI.
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: chad, Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T6343, T2617
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10859
