Summary: Ref T13603. This adds a second write to new "attachment" storage to all writers except one in Paste, which creates the file inline.
Test Plan:
- Updated a macro image, confirmed a write to "attachment" storage (transaction pathway).
- Updated a blog profile image, confirmed a write to "attachment" storage (legacy pathway).
Maniphest Tasks: T13603
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21816
Summary:
Ref T13661.
I'm fairly sure these policies don't actually do anything (you can't "interact" with a blog) but the primarily support a Phame Post object policy of "Same as Parent Blog", which is the "natural" interact policy for a post.
Most of this is infrastructure support for mutable interact policies: today, only Maniphest has interact mutability and only via indirect effects (locking tasks), not through a directly mutable "Can Interact" policy.
Test Plan:
Ran storage upgrade, edited interact policy of a blog, saw appropriate persistence and transactions.
Created and edited a task to make sure there's no weird fallout from increasing what can be done with interact policies.
Subscribers: PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Maniphest Tasks: T13661
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21751
Summary:
Ref T13513. This is mostly an infrastructure cleanup change.
In a perfect world, this would be a series of several changes, but they're tightly interconnected and don't have an obvious clean, nontrivial partition (or, at least, I don't see one). Followup changes will exercise this code repeatedly and all of these individual mutations are "obviously good", so I'm not too worried about the breadth of this change.
---
Inline comments are stored as transaction comments in the `PhabricatorAuditTransactionComment` and `DifferentialTransactionComment` classes.
On top of these two storage classes sit `PhabricatorAuditInlineComment` and `DifferentialInlineComment`. Historically, these were an indirection layer over significantly different storage classes, but nowadays both storage classes look pretty similar and most of the logic is actually the same. Prior to this change, these two classes were about 80% copy/pastes of one another.
Part of the reason they're so copy/pastey is that they implement a parent `Interface`. They are the only classes which implement this interface, and the interface does not provide any correctness guarantees (the storage objects are not actually constrained by it).
To simplify this:
- Make `PhabricatorInlineCommentInterface` an abstract base class instead.
- Lift as much code out of the `Audit` and `Differential` subclasses as possible.
- Delete methods which no longer have callers, or have only trivial callers.
---
Inline comments have two `View` rendering classes, `DetailView` and `EditView`. They share very little code.
Partly, this is because `EditView` does not take an `$inline` object. Historically, it needed to be able to operate on inlines that did not have an ID yet, and even further back in history this was probably just an outgrowth of a simple `<form />`.
These classes can be significantly simplified by passing an `$inline` to the `EditView`, instead of individually setting all the properties on the `View` itself. This allows the `DetailView` and `EditView` classes to share a lot of code.
The `EditView` can not fully render its content. Move the content rendering code into the view.
---
Prior to this change, some operations need to work on inlines that don't have an inline ID yet (we assign an ID the first time you "Save" a comment). Since "editing" comments will now be saved, we can instead create a row immediately.
This means that all the inline code can always rely on having a valid ID to work with, even if that ID corresponds to an empty, draft, "isEditing" comment. This simplifies more code in `EditView` and allows the "create" and "reply" code to be merged in `PhabricatorInlineCommentController`.
---
Client-side inline events are currently handled through a mixture of `ChangesetList` listeners (good) and ad-hoc row-level listeners (less good). In particular, the "save", "cancel", and "undo" events are row-level. All other events are list-level.
Move all events to list-level. This is supported by all inlines now having an ID at all stages of their lifecycle.
This allows some of the client behavior to be simplified. It currently depends on binding complex ad-hoc dictionaries into event handlers in `_drawRows()`, but it seems like almost all of this code can be removed. In fact, no more than one row ever seems to be drawn, so this code can probably be simplified further.
---
Finally, save an "isEditing" state. When we rebuild a revision on the client, click the "edit" button if it's in this state. This is a little hacky, but simpler to get into a stable state, since the row layout of an inline depends on a "view row" followed by an "edit row".
Test Plan:
- Created comments on either side of a diff.
- Edited a comment, reloaded, saw edit stick.
- Saved comments, reloaded, saw save stick.
- Edited a comment, typed text, cancelled, "unedited" to get state back.
- Created a comment, typed text, cancelled, "unedited" to get state back.
- Deleted a comment, "undeleted" to get state back.
Weirdness / known issues:
- Drafts don't autosave yet.
- Fixed in D21187:
- When you create an empty comment then reload, you get an empty editor. This is a bit silly.
- "Cancel" does not save state, but should, once drafts autosave.
- Mostly fixed in D21188:
- "Editing" comments aren't handled specially by the overall submission flow.
- "Editing" comments submitted in that state try to edit themselves again on load, which doesn't work.
Subscribers: jmeador
Maniphest Tasks: T13513
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D21186
Summary:
Depends on D19896. Ref T13222. See PHI873. Add a core "Sign With MFA" transaction type which prompts you for MFA and marks your transactions as MFA'd.
This is a one-shot gate and does not keep you in MFA.
Test Plan:
- Used "Sign with MFA", got prompted for MFA, answered MFA, saw transactions apply with MFA metadata and markers.
- Tried to sign alone, got appropriate errors.
- Tried to sign no-op changes, got appropriate errors.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D19897
Summary:
See PHI505. Ref T13124. If you're an agent of a hostile state trying to exfiltrate corporate secrets, you might find yourself foiled if Phabricator is secured behind a VPN.
To assist users in this situation, provide a "!history" command which will dump the entire history of an object in a nice text format and get through the troublesome VPN.
Some issues with this:
- You currently get all the "X added a comment." up top, and then all the comments below. This isn't terribly useful.
- This goes through the "Must Encrypt" flag, but possibly should not? (On the other hand, this is a pretty willful way to bypass it the flag.)
Test Plan: Used `bin/mail receive-test ...` to send `!history` commands, got somewhat-useful response mail.
Reviewers: amckinley
Reviewed By: amckinley
Maniphest Tasks: T13124
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D19372
Summary:
Depends on D19279. Ref T13110. This implements the existing publishing logic for buildables, but does so via ModularTransactions instead of a core transaction type.
Since each application is implementing build transactions independently, this removes the core type.
Next, Differential will get a similar treatment.
Test Plan: Used `bin/harbormaster publish` (with some commenting-out-guard-clauses) to publish a commit Buildable; saw unchanged feed behavior.
Subscribers: PHID-OPKG-gm6ozazyms6q6i22gyam
Maniphest Tasks: T13110
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D19280
Summary:
Ref T12314. If you set a form to have the "plant" subtype, then create a task with it, save "plant" as the task subtype.
For Conduit, the default subtype is used by default, but a new "subtype" transaction is exposed. You can apply this transaction at create time to create an object of a certain subtype, or at any later time to change the subtype of an object.
This still doesn't do anything particularly useful or interesting.
Test Plan:
- Created a non-subtyped object (a Paste).
- Created "task" and "plant" tasks via different forms.
- Created "default" and "plant" tasks via Conduit.
- Changed the subtype of a task via Conduit.
- Tried to set a bad subtype.
{F3492061}
{F3492066}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T12314
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D17443
Summary:
Ref T6027. We currently have two different transaction types:
- `TYPE_PROJECT_COLUMNS` does most of the work, but has a sort of weird structure and isn't really suitable for API use.
- `TYPE_COLUMN` is this weird, junk transaction which mostly just creates the other transaction.
Merge them into a single higher-level `TYPE_COLUMNS` transaction which works properly and has a sensible structure and comprehensive error checking.
Remaining work here:
- I've removed the old rendering logic, but not yet added new logic. I need to migrate the old transaction types and add new rendering logic.
- Although the internal representation is now //suitable// for use in the API, it isn't properly exposed yet.
Test Plan:
- Created tasks into a column.
- Ran unit tests.
- Moved tasks between columns.
- Will perform additional testing in followups.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6027
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15634
Summary:
Ref T10004. This restores "alice created this task." transactions, but in a generic way so we don't have to special case one of the other edits with an old `null` value.
In most cases, creating an object now shows only an "alice created this thing." transaction, unless nonempty defaults (usually, policy or spaces) were adjusted.
Test Plan: Created pastes, tasks, blogs, packages, and forms. Saw a single "alice created this thing." transaction.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T10004
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14820
Summary: All classes should extend from some other class. See D13275 for some explanation.
Test Plan: `arc unit`
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13283
Summary:
Ref T8424. This adds crude integration with Paste's edit/view workflows: you can change the space a Paste appears in, see transactions, and get a policy callout.
Lots of rough edges and non-obviousness but it pretty much works.
Test Plan:
- Created and updated Pastes.
- Moved them between spaces, saw policy effects.
- Read transactions.
- Looked at feed.
- Faked query to return no spaces, saw control and other stuff vanish.
- Faked query to return no spaces, created pastes.
- Tried to submit bad values and got errors.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T8424
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D13159
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:
Fixes T4810. When a buildable completes, make an effort to update the corresponding object with a success or failure message. Commits don't support this yet, but revisions do.
{F144614}
Test Plan:
- Used `bin/harbormaster build` and `bin/harbormaster update` to run a pile of builds.
- Tried good/bad builds.
- Sent some normal mail to make sure the mail reentrancy change didn't break stuff.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4810
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8803
Summary:
Ref T4010. Projects have a weird proto-version of ApplicationTransactions which is very similar but not quite the same.
Move the storage to a modern format, but keep all the other code for now.
Test Plan: Migrated project transactions; edited projects.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4010
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7370
Summary:
None of this code is reachable yet. See discussion in D6147. Ref T1703.
Provide tighter integration between ApplicationTransactions and CustomField. Basically, I'm just trying to get all the shared stuff into the base implementation.
Test Plan: Code not reachable.
Reviewers: chad, seporaitis
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1703
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6149
Summary:
Split Pholio's transaction implementation into generic and application-specific parts. Moves us toward generic transactions, with support for:
- Editing and deleting comments.
- Setting visibility of individual comments (I'm not a fan of this feature but we'll see).
I want to move everything to a more generic piece of infrastructure but there's very little they can share right now so adding transactions to, e.g., Paste or Macros (T2157) means massive amounts of similar code.
Tons of work left to do here, but I think it basically works. Here's a screenshot:
{F26820}
Test Plan: Made transactions in Pholio.
Reviewers: btrahan, vrana, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2104
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D4136
