Summary:
- Move table to Repository, since we have no Owners joins in the application anymore but would like to do a Repository join.
- Rename "packagePHID" to "auditorPHID", since this column may contain package, project, or user PHIDs.
Test Plan:
- Browsed Owners, Audit, and Differential interfaces to the Audit tool.
- Made comments and state changes.
- Ran "reparse.php --herald --owners" on several commits.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley, nh, vrana
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1787
Summary:
- Users may elect to receive an initial notification about a commit; allow it to be replied to in order to interact with the object.
- Share thread headers between emails.
- Add the "REPLY HANDLER ACTIONS" section to both emails.
Test Plan:
- Used "reparse.php --herald" to trigger herald emails, verified reply-to and email body.
- Made audit comments, verified body.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1762
Summary:
- Add a proper mailKey field to make these things mailable. Backfill all
existing objects.
- Denormalize authorPHID to the commit object so we can query by it
efficiently in a future diff. We currently use the search engine to drive
"commits by author" but that's not so good for audit, which needs more
constraints.
- Add an overall audit status field so we can efficiently query "commits that
needs your attention".
- Add enough code to convince myself that these fields are basically
reasonable and work correctly.
Test Plan:
- Ran schema upgrades. Checked database state afterward.
- Ran "reparse.php --owners --herald" to verify worker changes.
- Looked at a commit, altered aggregate status via audits / reparse.php,
verified it responded correctly.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, epriestley, nh
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1706
Summary:
When users submit an audit, send email to relevant parties informing them.
Allow email to be replied to. Just basic support so far; no "!raise" stuff and
no threading with the Herald commit notification.
Test Plan: Made comments, got email. Replied to email, got comments.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1698
Summary:
If a user comments on a commit but they don't currently have any audits they're
authoritative on, create a new one.
This makes it easier to handle other things more consistently, like figuring out
the overall audit status of a commit and who should get emails.
Test Plan: Made comments on commits I had authority on and did not have
authority on.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1697
Summary: Add audit information to the commit search index.
Test Plan: Updated a commit, searched for terms in its comments, got hits.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1696
Summary: When a user posts an action in the audit tool, publish it to feed.
Test Plan: Made some comments, saw them show up in feed.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1695
Summary:
Allows you to write a commit rule that triggers an audit by a user (personal
rules) or a project (global rules).
Mostly this is trying to make auditing more lightweight and accessible in
environments where setting up Owners packages doesn't make sense.
For instance, Disqus wants a rule like "trigger an audit for everything that
didn't have a Differential revision". While not necessarily scalable, this is a
perfectly reasonable rule for a small company, but a lot of work to implement
with Owners (and you'll get a lot of collateral damage if you don't make every
committer a project owner).
Instead, they can create a project called 'Unreviewed Commits' and write a rule
like:
- When: Differential revision does not exist
- Action: Trigger an Audit for project: "Unreviewed Commits"
Then whoever cares can join that project and they'll see those audits in their
queue, and when they approve/raise on commits their actions will affect the
project audit.
Similarly, if I want to look at all commits that match some other rule (say,
XSS) but only want to do it like once a month, I can just set up an audit rule
and go through the queue when I feel like it.
NOTE: This abuses the 'packagePHID' field to also store user and project PHIDs.
Through the magic of handles, this (apparently) works fine for now; I'll do a
big schema patch soon but have several other edits I want to make at the same
time.
Also:
- Adds an "active" fiew for /audit/, eventually this will be like the
Differential "active" view (stuff that is relevant to you right now).
- On commits, highlight triggered audits you are responsible for.
Test Plan: Added personal and global audit triggers to Herald, reparsed some
commits with --herald, got audits. Browsed all audit interfaces to make sure
nothing exploded. Viewed a commit where I was responsible for only some audits.
Performed audits and made sure the triggers I am supposed to be responsible for
updated properly.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: jungejason
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1690
Summary:
This is intended to supplant the existing "audit edit" interface. I've changed
them to both drive down the same write pathway, but the UIs are still different.
I'll fully merge them in a future diff.
Add a comment box (like Maniphest and Differential) to Diffusion. When users
make comments, their comments appear on the commit. Any audits triggers they are
responsible for are updated to reflect actions they take, as well.
Currently, audits can only be triggered by packages, but I intend to allow them
to be triggered by users and projects (via herald rules) in an upcoming diff.
Thus some of the language like "projects, users or packages" when the code is
clearly dealing only with "packagePHID".
Test Plan: Made audit updates via commit interface and via existing edit
interface. Verified both interfaces updated correctly, and that audit
responsibility rules were applied properly.
Reviewers: btrahan, jungejason
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T904
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D1688
