Summary:
Ref T3092.
Releeph's objects basically go like this:
- At the top level, we have Projects (like "www" or "libphutil")
- Each project has Branches (like "LATEST" or "v1.1.3")
- Each branch has Requests (like pull requests, e.g. "please merge commit X into branch Y (in project Z)")
Currently, there's no real "project detail" or "branch detail" page. Instead, we have a search results page for their contained objects. That is, the "project detail" page shows a list of branches in the project, using ApplicationSearch.
This means that operations like "edit" and "deactivate" are one level up, on the respective list pages.
Instead, move details onto the detail pages. This gives us more room for actions and information, and simplifies the list views.
Basically, these are "detail pages" where the object content is a search interface. We do something simliar to this in Phame right now, although it's messier there (no ApplicationSearch yet).
@chad, you might have some ideas here. Roughly, the design question is "How should we present an object's detail view when its content is really a search interface (Phame Blog for Posts, Releeph Project for Branches)?"
I think the simple approach I've taken here (see screenshot) gives us reasonable results, but overall it's something we haven't done much or done too much thinking about, I think.
Test Plan: {F54774}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6771
Summary:
Fixes T3661. Ref T3718. This makes Releeph custom fields extend PhabricatorCustomField so we can start moving over other pieces of infrastructure (rendering, storage, etc) to run through the same pathways. It's roughly the minimum amount of work required to be able to move forward.
NOTE: This removes per-project custom field selectors. Fields are now configured for an entire install. My understanding is that Facebook does not use this feature, and modern field infrastructure has moved away from selectors.
Test Plan: Viewed and edited projects, branches, and requests in Releeph. Grepped for removed config. Grepped for `field_selector`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3661, T3718
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6750
Summary:
Fixes T3660. Releeph Projects currently have an unused one-to-one mapping to Phabricator projects. This isn't consistent with other applications and has no integrations or uses. Get rid of it.
NOTE: Waiting for signoff from @legneato on T3660 before pulling the trigger here.
Test Plan: Created and edited Releeph projects. Grepped for references to project ID; there are a dozen or so but they're all either Releeph projects or Arcanist projects.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3660
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6635
Summary: Ref T3655. Depends on D6633. This removes the writes and the column.
Test Plan: Created a project, edited a project. Verified the table doesn't have any keys including this column.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3655
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6634
Summary:
Ref T3655. ReleephProject currently has both `repositoryID` and `repositoryPHID`, which point to the same object and are reudundant. Get rid of all reads of `repositoryID`.
NOTE: This makes project loads depend on repository loads. The eventual rule here will be that you must be able to see a repository in order to see projects for that repository, which seems like a reasonable rule. We might need to tailor it more than this (e.g., if there are branch read permissions down the line) but this seems like a reasonable minimum.
Test Plan: Grepped for `repositoryID` in `releeph/`. Called `releeph.getbranches`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3655
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6633
Summary: I used the `PhabricatorEnv::getProductionURI()` in too many places to build Releeph URIs. The only places that should need full URIs are the links generated for Releeph emails, and in Conduit responses that link to Releeph objects.
Test Plan:
- Grep for `getProductionURI()` in Releeph, and make sure only sensible, non-DOM building places use it.
- Inspect the Releeph DOM to make sure hrefs etc. are relative.
Reviewers: wez, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5999
Summary: Instead of being able to ask if someone was a pusher or not, ask if they are "authoritative" enough to make decisions about Releeph requests. A person is authoritative if a project has pushers, and they are a pusher, or in the case of pusher-less projects, everyone is authoritative.
Test Plan: Make a request in a project with no pushers (it is immediately ready to be picked) and a project with pushers (where it requires approval.)
Reviewers: wez, epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5877
Summary:
Adds a policy-aware query class for selecting Releeph projects. This doesn't really change anything.
- Make `ReleephProject` implment `PhabricatorPolicyInterface`, beginning the long journey to make it policy-aware.
- Implement `ReleephProjectQuery`, for querying projects using cursor-based, policy-aware paging.
- Use it on the list view, so we load only ~100 projects instead of all of them.
- Tweaked some of the URI routing stuff to make it a little more consistent with common practices.
Ref T2714.
Test Plan:
{F36434}
{F36435}
Reviewers: edward
Reviewed By: edward
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2714
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5390
