Summary: Ref T2222. These don't work yet. We just have to copy a couple fields, but let's sort that out later since this is purely a new feature.
Test Plan: Looked at a revision, no edit links.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8222
Summary: Ref T2222. This is a `tmp.differential`-only issue. Inline comment transactions now have content, so we treat them like body text. We also render them separately as inline text. This produces mail where inlines are rendered twice.
Test Plan: Sent myself mail, saw only one copy of inlines.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8216
Summary:
Ref T2222. This gets rid of Differential's custom view and uses a standard view instead.
This also mostly fixes the rendering logic for inlines.
This is headed to the `tmp.differential` branch.
Test Plan: {F112696}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1790, T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8215
Summary: Ref T2222. On the `tmp.differential` branch, we're currently having
issues parsing commits which reference Differential revisions, because the
"user closed this revision (closed by commit xyz)" message is fataling:
[2014-02-13 14:12:36] EXCEPTION: (PhutilProxyException) Error while
executing task ID 345358 from queue. {>} (AphrontQueryException)
#1048: Column 'contentSource' cannot be null
Specifically, the MessageParser pathway for CommentEditor doesn't set a content
source. Make sure CommentEditor always sets a content source.
(This is also causing a buildup of diffs on D8212 and D8211.)
Auditors: btrahan
Summary:
Ref T2222. This is the big one.
This migrates each `DifferentialComment` to one or more ApplicationTransactions (action, cc, reviewers, update, comment, inlines), and makes `DifferentialComment` a double-reader for ApplicationTransactions.
The migration is pretty straightforward:
- If a comment took an action not otherwise covered, it gets an "action" transaction. This is something like "epriestley abandoned this revision.".
- If a comment updated the diff, it gets an "updated diff" transaction. Very old transactions of this type may not have a diff ID (probably only at Facebook).
- If a comment added or removed reviewers, it gets a "changed reviewers" transaction.
- If a comment added CCs, it gets a "subscribers" transaction.
- If a comment added comment text, it gets a "comment" transaction.
- For each inline attached to a comment, we generate an "inline" transaction.
Most comments generate a small number of transactions, but a few generate a significant number.
At HEAD, the code is basically already doing this, so comments in the last day or two already obey these rules, roughly, and will all generate only one transaction (except inlines).
Because we've already preallocated PHIDs in the comment text table, we only need to write to the transaction table.
NOTE: This significantly degrades Differential, making inline comments pretty much useless (they each get their own transaction, and don't show line numbers or files). The data is all fine, but the UI is garbage now. This needs to be fixed before we can deploy this to users, but it's easily separable since it's all just display code.
Specifically, they look like this:
{F112270}
Test Plan:
I've migrated locally and put things through their paces, but it's hard to catch sketchy stuff locally because most of my test data is nonsense and bad migrations wouldn't necessarily look out of place.
IMPORTANT: I'm planning to push this to a branch and then shift production over to the branch, and run it for a day or two before bringing it to master.
I generally feel good about this change: it's not that big since we were able to separate a lot of pieces out of it, and it's pretty straightforward. That said, it's still one of the most scary/dangerous changes we've ever made.
Reviewers: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8210
Summary: Ref T2222. A few rendering interfaces rely on fishing the revision ID out of a DifferentialComment, but it will only have the PHID soon. Pass in the revision and use it to determine the ID instead.
Test Plan: Browsed, previewed, examined comments. Clicked anchors.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8209
Summary:
Ref T2222. I wiped out the Differential-specific stats page a long time ago, but missed this. It turned up recently in `grep`.
Facts will eventually fill this role; this code is unreachable; it probably doesn't work now and definitely won't work in a day or two after ApplicationTransactions.
Test Plan: Used `grep` to look for callsites.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8208
Summary: Ref T2222. We need this `clone` when constructing the new multi-comments in Differential, or we get double-comments internally. This shows up as emails with double comment text.
Test Plan: Sent some "Accept + comment" emails, only one comment in the body.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8206
Summary:
Updates PhabricatorTimeline to PHUITimeline. Uses standard colors and spacing, softens up the actors, and reduces visual spacing of action-only events.
- Also updated some 2x sprite images.
Test Plan: Tested Tasks Paste and Pholio in my sandbox.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8205
Summary:
Ref T2222. Ref T4415. We're still writing Differential subscription stuff into this weird legacy `differential_relationship` table, which is like an edge table but extremely ancient.
Move it into a proper table.
I've removed `withSubscriptions()` from `DifferentialRevisionQuery`. It was weird, doesn't work consistently with other similar filters, and was only used by the API. Now it means "ccs", which is consistent with the ApplicationSearch UI and with Maniphest.
Test Plan:
Without migrating, added and removed subscribers via various workflows. Queried for subscribers. Everything worked as expected.
Ran the migration, verified data survived.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: FacebookPOC, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222, T4415
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8202
Summary:
See D8200. Ref T2222. Instead of writing one comment which can have a ton of different effects, write a series of one-effect comments. These will be easier to convert into ApplicationTransactions.
This has a minor user-facing effect of making these multiple-action comments render separately:
{F111919}
Once the migration completes, they should automatically merge together nicely again.
Test Plan: Made a bunch of comments and took a bunch of actions, all of which worked normally except that they rendered as several things instead of just one.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, FacebookPOC
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8201
Summary:
Ref T2222. Instead of writing one comment which performs both a diff update and adds a comment, write two comments, one for each action. These will translate directly into ApplicationTransactions writes.
This has a small impact on the UX: these updates now render in two rows, instead of one. After T2222, they'll automerge back together.
{F111909}
Test Plan: Updated a revision.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8200
Summary:
Ref T2222. Currently, one `DifferentialComment` can do a lot of things (add ccs, reviewers, comments, inline comments, and perform state changes). In the future, each `ApplicationTransaction` does only one thing. This is the primary piece of complexity which makes the upcoming migration risky, because each comment needs to migrate into multiple transactions.
I want to mitigate this complexity as much as possible before the migration itself happens. One approach I'm going to use to do that is to start writing one comment per effect now, so the mapping is more direct when the migration itself happens and the write code can be straightforward (one row per save()) after the migration.
This tackles a small piece of that, which is the mail Differential sends. Currently, Differential mail acts on a single comment. Instead, allow it to act on a list of comments, but always give it one comment for now. In the future, we can hand it several comments instead and still get the expected behavior.
This change should have no impact on any application behaviors.
Test Plan:
- Commented;
- commented with inline;
- added reviewers;
- added CCs;
- added CCs via mentions;
- updated revision;
- looked at all the mail, all of which seemed sane.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8199
Summary: we should build all the image stuff on every post and use that posted image data if there's an error. this diff makes that so. Fixes T4380.
Test Plan: made a mock with no title, tried to save it, and was delighted to see my images still there. edited a mock - removing the title and adding images - verified edits showed up after erroneous submission. added a title and submitted and changes were saved.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4380
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8197
Summary:
Ref T2222. Currently, `DifferentialComment` stores both (a) the text of comments and (b) various other transaction details. This data needs to map to both Transactions and TransactionComments in the long run. This diff separates out all the data which is bound for the TransactionComment table, so that when we migrate `DifferentialComment` itself it will //only// need to migrate into the Transactions table. This is a much simpler migration than the inline comment one was, partly because it set up infrastructure and partly because the data is less complex.
Basically, I'm just proxying the read/write for the comment text into the other table. All readers already go through the Query class, and there are only three writers (preview, comment, implicit comment on diff update) which are all highly regular and straightforward to test.
We can also back out of this diff very easily: doing double writes cost only one line of code (`$this->content = $content;`) so we have proper double writes and a trivial revert path.
Test Plan:
- Without migrating, added comments and saw them show up.
- Migrated.
- Saw all the old comments, and no damage to the new ones.
- Added new comments.
- Used comment preview.
- Updated a revision to implicitly create an update comment and verified it looked OK.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T2222
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8196
Summary: Fixes T4409. I didn't get this quite right when I updated it to ApplicationTransactions.
Test Plan: Renamed a project, saw wiki move.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4409
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8198
Summary: we were calling a member method on a diffusion hash. not sure why. Fixes T4402
Test Plan: clicked about, no fatals and seemed to move sensical backwards in time
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4402
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8194
Summary:
Fixes T4379. Several changes:
- Migrate all project members into subscribers.
- When members are added or removed, subscribe or unsubscribe them.
- Show sub/unsub in the UI.
- Determine mailable membership of projects by querying subscribers.
Test Plan:
- As `duck`, joined a project.
- Added the project as a reviewer to a revision.
- Commented on the revision.
- Observed `duck` receive mail.
- Unsubscribed as `duck`.
- Observed no mail.
- Resubscribed as `duck`.
- Mail again.
- Joined/left project, checked sub/unsub status.
- Ran migration, looked at database.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, asherkin
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8189
Summary:
These didn't get updated either when the main search got rebuilt. Adjust and modernize them. Also this uses "exclude", which I couldn't find any callsites for but just missed, so restore that.
At some point I plan to swap this whole thing to ApplicationSearch and that will let us get rid of a bunch of stuff.
Test Plan: Searched for all filters, got sensible results, verified source object doesn't show up as a result.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran, mbishopim3
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8188
Summary:
Ref T4403. Implements "only the first time" for Maniphest rules, and fixes the trigger itself.
The trigger would never fire and block rules because it was comparing a string (like "first") to an int (like 0).
The "only" vs "every" stuff is contributed and I should have pushed back harder on this toInt / toString stuff. Maybe I'll just get rid of it; it purely causes confusion and problems.
Test Plan: Wrote an "only the first time" rule, ran it twice, it applied once.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4403
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8193
Summary: Ref T1344. I don't think we'll need to destroy any data moving forward, and would like to get more feedback about what changes users want.
Test Plan: Looked at a project and clicked onto its board.
Reviewers: chad, btrahan
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1344
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8191
Summary: ...by the surprising step of changing how this data is stored from id to phid. Also a small fix to not allow "disabled" rules to be used as herald rule conditions, i.e. can't make a rule that depends on a disabled rule.
Test Plan: viewed existing herald rule that had a rule condition and noted nice new display using handle. made a new rule that had a rule condition and verified it worked correctly.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8186
Summary:
Ref T4379. Fixes T4359. Currently, `bin/search index` does not rebuild CustomField indexes. This is because they aren't really part of the main search index. However, from a user's point of view this is by far the most logical place to look for index rebuilds, and it's straightforward for us to write into this secondary store.
At some point, it might be nice to let you specify fields as "fulltext" too, although no one has asked for that yet. We could then dump the text of those fields into the fulltext index. Ref T418.
Test Plan: Used `bin/search index --type proj --trace`, etc., and examination of the database to verify that indexes rebuilt. Reindexed users, tasks, projects.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4359, T418, T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8185
Summary:
Ref T4379. Long ago, the "Project" vs "ProjectProfile" split was intended to allow a bunch of special fields on projects without burdening the simple use cases, but CustomField handles that far better and far more generally, and doing this makes using ApplicationTransactions a pain to get right, so get rid of it.
The only remaining field is `profileImagePHID`, which we can just move to the main Project object. This is custom enough that I think it's reasonable not to express it as a custom field.
Test Plan: Created a project, set profile, edited project, viewed in typeahead, ran migration, verified database results.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8183
Summary: Ref T4379. Major goal here is to remove `ProjectProfile` so all edits use ApplicationTransactions. This also makes things more flexible, allowing users to disable this field if they don't like it.
Test Plan: Ran migration, verified data survived, edited/created projects, reordered fields.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8182
Summary:
Ref T4379. Ref T3794. Fixes T4010. This brings CustomFields to projects.
My primary goal is to get rid of the special casing around project profiles and profile editing, so all edits are ApplicationTransactions. Particularly, I want to make the "blurb/description" field a custom field which goes through builtin infrastructure.
A distant secondary goal is that this is a feature which users like/want because users like/want features.
Test Plan: Added a custom field and examined it in the edit, view, and search interfaces.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3794, T4010, T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8180
Summary: Use standard spacing and colors
Test Plan: Reload pinboard home, see correct gutters and colors
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8187
Summary:
Ref T4379. Currently, you can edit away your edit capability in Projects. Prevent this in a general way.
Since some objects have complex edit policies (like "the owner can always edit"), we can't just check the value itself. We also can't fairly assume that every object has a `setEditPolicy()` method, even though almost all do right now. Instead, provide a way to pretend we've completed the edit and changed the policy.
Test Plan: Unit tests, tried to edit away my edit capability.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8179
Summary:
Ref T4379. Projects currently include their "delete/disable" function as part of edit, which is atypical. Instead, provide it as a first-class action. This is primarily for consistency between applications.
(The action list on projects is getting pretty huge, but we can deal with that separately; I have some ideas.)
Test Plan: Archived/unarchived a project. Edited a project.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8177
Summary:
Ref T4379. Perform all editing with modern transaction infrastructure. A few practical changes here:
- Message for "project name required" should be a little nicer. I'll deal with this once more stuff gets straightened out. You get a reasonable message now, it's just not nicely handled as part of the form.
- Message for "project name is not unique" should be a little nicer. Same as above.
- Previously, we would automatically archive a project when the last member left or was removed. I'll probably restore this in a bit but am omitting it for the moment for simplicity.
- Previously, we would create projects with goofy nonsensical permissions. Now we create them with reasonable permissions.
Test Plan:
- Created project.
- Edited project.
- Ran unit tests.
- Viewed project edit history.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8168
Summary:
Ref T4379. Projects has been partially converted to ApplicationTransactions, but the rough state of the world is that all the //storage// is modern, but most of the stuff on top isn't yet. Particularly, there's a `PhabricatorProjectEditor` which is //not// a subclass of `PhabricatorApplicationTransactionEditor`, but which fakes its way through writing reasonable data into modern storage.
This introduces a real transaction editor, `PhabricatorProjectTransactionEditor`, with the eventual goal of moving all of the old functionality into it and deleting the old class. This diff only moves the membership transaction into new code (it doesn't even move all of it -- when we create a project, we add the author as a member, and that can't move quite yet since there are other transactions at the same time).
Test Plan:
- Created a new project.
- Edited members.
- Joined / left project.
- This already has a pile of unit test coverage.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8167
Summary:
Ref T4379. When you add a redundant edge, we currently compare the values strictly, using `===`. However, the old and new versions of the edge have slightly different member data, because one has been synthetically constructed and one has been read from the database.
Instead, compare only the things we actually care about:
# Were any destintations added or removed?
# Was any edge data changed?
If the answer to both questions is "no", consider the update a no-op.
Test Plan: In the next diff, I'm making project members use the EDGE transaction type. Before this change, adding an existing project member would generate a transaction with no changes. Now, it is correctly detected as a no-op, while normal transactions continue to work properly.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8166
Summary:
Ref T4379. I want project subscriptions to work like this (yell if this seems whacky, since it makes subscriptions mean somethign a little different for projects than they do for other objects):
- You can only subscribe to a project if you're a project member.
- When you're added as a member, you're added as a subscriber.
- When you're removed as a member, you're removed as a subscriber.
- While you're a member, you can optionally unsubscribe.
From a UI perspective:
- We don't show the subscriber list, since it's going to be some uninteresting subset of the member list.
- We don't show CC transactions in history, since they're an uninteresting near-approximation of the membership transactions.
- You only see the subscription controls if you're a member.
To do this, I've augmented `PhabricatorSubscribableInterface` with two new methods. It would be nice if we were on PHP 5.4+ and could just use traits for this, but we should get data about version usage before we think about this. For now, copy/paste the default implementations into every implementing class.
Then, I implemented the interface in `PhabricatorProject` but with alternate defaults.
Test Plan:
- Used the normal interaction on existing objects.
- This has no actual effect on projects, verified no subscription stuff mysteriously appeared.
- Hit the new error case by fiddling with the UI.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4379
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8165
Summary: Add described, simple header and icon with divider.
Test Plan: Tested on an existing mock and created a new mock with and without a description.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8181
Summary: standard ish. Fixes T4388.
Test Plan: made a comment with L1 and noted L1 linked to L1. Also observed working-ish hovercard.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4388
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8178
Summary: Adds a handy bar full of tiny buttons. Use only when directed. Ref: T4394
Test Plan: View UI Examples.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8169
Summary: I don't think this is too terrible, and makes the future easier? Maybe?
Test Plan: ALLCAPS translation, Viewed a diff, feed, and notifications.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8175
Summary: After the recent search changes, the filter here changed from `type` to `types`. Currently, if you click "Attach Differential Revisions", it shows objects of too many types.
Test Plan: Clickced "Attach Differential Revisions" or whatever it's called, just saw revisions.
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: aran
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8164
Summary:
Ref T4387. By using `hg locate` to attempt to only list files in the given path
browsing diffusion is a bit faster. In a repo of about 600M it shaves a rough 100ms
off viewing the root of the project.
Test Plan: Looked around in diffusion and saw it showed everything including .files, which was nice
Reviewers: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: Korvin, epriestley, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T4387
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8163
