Summary: Normalize "getViewURI" and "getLiveURI" for PhameBlog and PhamePost. Use pretty URIs in PhamePost
Test Plan: View Recent, View posts, edit post, new post, move post, view live.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14713
Summary: Ref T9908. This fixes "Create Subtask" so it works with the new stuff. Mostly straightforward.
Test Plan: Created some subtasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14706
Summary: Ref T9908. This form has a reasonable behavior now after the global reordering stuff.
Test Plan: Clicked "Edit Task".
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14708
Summary:
A guide to basic skills every software professional should have.
This is so fundamental that I don't think the document is actually helpful, but we can try it I guess.
Test Plan: Reading?
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: Shredder121
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14707
Summary:
Ref T9908. This removes the "Create Another Empty Task", "Create A Similar Task" and "Create Another Subtask of Same Parent Task" workflow callouts on the task detail page, which are actions that show up after creating a task or creating a subtask.
- I think "Create Empty" isn't relevant now that we have "Create Task" nearby and the quick create menu?
- I'm not sure if "Create Similar" is worth keeping. If we do want to retain it, I'd maybe like to find a way to do it generically.
- I'm likewise not sure if "Create another subtask" is worth keeping.
Overall, these actions are weird/unusual and I'm not sure how valuable they are. I'm open to keeping "Similar" and/or "Subtask" but I'd like to verify that they're still valuable and make sure we have a reasonable design for them if we retain them.
For example, if we want to retain "Similar", maybe a better approach is just to add "Create Similar Object" to every action menu (which is now possible for EditEngine applications)? There's at least some interest in "Create Similar Repository" in Diffusion.
Also removes a very very old piece of "attached files" code.
Test Plan: Created and viewed some tasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14705
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. Puts reordering UI in place:
- For create forms, this just lets you pick a UI display order other than alphabetical. Seems nice to have.
- For edit forms, this lets you create a hierarchy of advanced-to-basic forms and give them different visibility policies, if you want.
Test Plan:
{F1017842}
- Verified that "Edit Thing" now takes me to the highest-ranked edit form.
- Verified that create menu and quick create menu reflect application order.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14704
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. This attempts to move us forward on answering this question:
> Which form gets used when a user clicks "Edit Task"?
One answer is "the same form that was used to create the task". There are several problems with that:
- The form might not exist anymore.
- The user might not have permission to see it.
- Some of the fields might be hidden, essentially preventing them from being edited.
- We have to store the value somewhere and old tasks won't have a value.
- Any instructions on the form probably don't apply to edits.
One answer is "force the default, full form". That's not as problematic, but it means we have no ability to create limited access users who see fewer fields.
The answer in this diff is:
- Forms can be marked as "edit forms".
- We take the user to the first edit form they have permission to see, from a master list.
This allows you to create several forms like:
- Advanced Edit Form (say, all fields -- visible to administrators).
- Basic Edit Form (say, no policies -- visible to trusted users).
- Noob Edit Form (say, no policies, priorities, or status -- visible to everyone).
Then you can give everyone access to "noob", some people access to "basic", and a few people access to "advanced".
This might only be part of the answer. In particular, you can still //use// any edit form you can see, so we could do these things in the future:
- Give you an option to switch to a different form if you want.
- Save the form the task was created with, and use that form by default.
If we do pursue those, we can fall back to this behavior if there's a problem with them (e.g., original form doesn't exist or wasn't recorded).
There's also no "reorder" UI yet, that'll be coming in the next diff.
I'm also going to try to probably make the "create" and "edit" stuff a little more consistent / less weird in a bit.
Test Plan: Marked various forms as edit forms or not edit forms, made edits, hit permissions errors, etc.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14702
Summary: Fixes T9928. Not sure if this is best mechanic or add new methods to PhamePostQuery (a join?)
Test Plan: Archive a blog, don't see posts on PhameHome
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9928
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14701
Summary:
Ref T9908. Simplify some of the policies here:
- If you can edit an application (currently, always "Administrators"), you can view and edit all of its forms.
- You must be able to edit an application to create new forms.
- Improve some error messages.
- Get about halfway through letting users reorder forms in the "Create" menu if they want to sort by something weird since it'll need schema changes and I can do them all in one go here.
Test Plan:
- Tried to create and edit forms as an unprivileged user.
- Created and edited forms as an administrator.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14700
Summary: Moves New Post and Move Post to be separate Controllers with Dialogs. Ref T9897
Test Plan: Move a post to a new blog, see message and see post. Click New Post, get dialog, pick blog, edit new post.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9897
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14698
Summary:
Ref T9132. Ref T9908. Fixes T5622. This allows you to copy some fields (projects, subscribers, custom fields, some per-application) from another object when creating a new object by passing the `?template=xyz` parameter.
Extend "copy" support to work with all custom fields.
Test Plan:
- Created new pastes, packages, tasks using `?template=...`
- Viewed new template docs page.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T5622, T9132, T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14699
Summary:
Ref T9908. We can get a double-header with this ("Quick Create", "Create Task") which looks weird.
The behavior of this menu is probably obvious enough on its own from context and the "+" icon.
Test Plan: Opened menu, no more "Quick Create" item.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14696
Summary:
Ref T9908. This is a behavioral change:
- Old behavior: "Subscribers" field is default-populated with author.
- New behavior: this transaction is just created no matter what.
The new behavior is much easier to make work with form defaults, hidden fields, etc. For example, on the "Create Bug" form, I've hidden "Subscribers", but I still want the author to be subscribed.
And if a user sets the default value of "Subscribers:" to "Alice, Bob", they almost certainly mean "Alice, Bob, and the task author".
And I ended up deleting myself by accident way more often than I deleted myself on purpose -- especially with "Create Similar task", I'd sometimes delete all the CCs and delete myself by accident and then have to put myself back.
Finally, technically speaking, restoring the old behavior is kind of hard/messy and this is much easier.
Test Plan:
- Created a task.
- Was automatically added as a subscriber.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14694
Summary:
Ref T9908. When there are custom / renamed / policy considerations for applications, respect them in the quick create menu.
This has some performance implications, in that it makes every page slower by two queries (and potentially more, soon), which is quite bad. I have some ideas to mitigate this, but it's not the end of the world to eat these queries for now.
Test Plan: {F1017316}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14693
Summary: Ref T9908. Now that you can submit multiple actions, you can "Open + Assign/Claim" a closed task, which is a reasonable action.
Test Plan: Assign/claim'd a closed task.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14692
Summary:
Ref T9908.
- You should not need edit permission on a task in order to comment on it.
- At least for now, ignore any customization in Conduit and Stacked Actions. These UIs always use the full edit form as it's written in the application.
Test Plan:
- Verified a non-editor can now comment on tasks they can see.
- Verified a user still can't use an edit form they can't see.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9908
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14691
Summary: Fixes T6132. We currently allow invalid configuration here; validate it.
Test Plan: Tried to save invalid config (negative priorities, string priorities, etc).
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T6132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14689
Summary:
Fixes T8707. See that task for discussion. Browser behavior is apparently to ignore a newline immediately following a `<textarea>`, and ostensibly has been since the early 1800s.
This is the same fix Rails used when it encountered this issue in 2011, which gives me some confidence it is correct.
Test Plan:
- Edited a task with leading newlines in the description.
- Newlines were preserved correctly across multiple edits.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T8707
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14688
Summary: I wrote this earlier in D14680 but have now realized that it's the same sentence twice when read carefully.
Test Plan: read more carefully
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14687
Summary: Update Ponder Questions and Answers to render Remarkup in Feed
Test Plan: New Question, Edit Question, New Answer, Edit Answer, New Comment. See //remarkup// in Feed.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9825
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14648
Summary:
- ipull there is wrong
- The `+` wasn't doing what I thought it was doing.
- I already forgot what that detour was doing, so I wrote it down.
Test Plan: Load Versions page, see no error log.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14686
Summary: Fixes T5788. We already have this as a pre-commit field, add it as a post-commit field too.
Test Plan: Ran this rule on a merge commit. Also ran it on a non-merge commit. Both got the correct value.
Reviewers: avivey, chad
Reviewed By: avivey, chad
Subscribers: avivey
Maniphest Tasks: T5788
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14685
Summary:
Fixes T9206. This was also blocked on tokenizers being weird.
Also clean up some rendering stuff from the earlier changes.
Test Plan:
- Added an "unassign" rule by typing "None", per instructions in the placeholder text.
- Ran the rule.
- Task got unassigned.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9206
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14684
Summary:
Ref T7848. This is a companion to "Change status to: ...".
(I'm pretty sure the only reason I didn't originally write these was the tokenizer bug in D14682, I just forgot about it).
This is basically a copy/paste of the "status" action.
Test Plan:
- Wrote a rule to change task priorities.
- Edited a task.
- Saw rule fire properly.
- Tokens also stick around correctly.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T7848
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14683
Summary:
Fixes T7848. @jasonfsmitty discussed an issue in great detail there and in D14359, and I completely missed it. Specifically:
- If you save a "Change status to: Open" rule in Maniphest, and then edit it again, the token shows "Unknown Object (???)" instead of the correct token.
- That's because loadHandles() has no idea what to do with the value "open", since it's not a real PHID.
The way we render tokenizer tokens in Herald is quite hacky right now. Fortunately, I wrote a //slightly// better way for EditEngine yesterday or the day before. Use the slightly better way to fix the issue with D14359.
This could still be better than it is, but the badness is mostly hidden now and can be cleaned up later without impacting anything.
Test Plan: Edited a Herald rule with projects and status changes, saw proper tokens.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Subscribers: jasonfsmitty
Maniphest Tasks: T7848
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14682
Summary: Fixes T9496. If you have some statuses or priorities you don't need, allow users to disable them to stop the bleeding.
Test Plan:
- Set task to status X and priority Y.
- Disabled X and Y using config.
- Verified task still had old status/priority.
- Verified new task could not be created/edited into those settings.
- Verified task/priority appeared in typeahead, but were marked as disabled.
- Viewed email command docs.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9496
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14681
Summary:
Ref T7848. This patch is incomplete and has the following issues:
- Multiple statuses can be entered on the edit rule page (only the first one is used).
- Statuses are not rendered correctly when re-editing a rule.
Test Plan: Applied to our local phab instance and verified it works with our task workflow.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: joshuaspence, revi, epriestley, jsmith
Maniphest Tasks: T7848
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14359
Summary:
Fixes T7250. Currently, if a display group of transactions (multiple transactions by the same author in a short period of time with no intervening comments) has several transactions of similar strength (e.g., several status change transactions) we can end up displaying them in reverse chronological order, which is confusing.
Instead, make sure transactions of the same type/strength are always in logical order.
Test Plan:
- Merged a task into another task, then reopened the merged task.
- Before patch: merge/reopen showed in wrong order.
{F1014954}
- After patch: merge/reopen show in correct order.
{F1014955}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T7250
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14680
Summary: For consistency, plus I ignore these. Ref T9897
Test Plan: Change to notify, log into notchad, subscribe, change back, see notification instead of email.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9909, T9897
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14676
Summary: This just pretties up some config like `maniphest.custom-field-definitions` which I noticed was kind of hard to read while chasing down other stuff.
Test Plan: {F1014940}
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14679
Summary: Ref T9132. See T9908#147038.
Test Plan:
- As user A, created a new task.
- As user B, started typing a comment on it (with no prior activity).
- Users A and B must be different.
Before patch: preview/draft don't work, trace in error log (see above).
After patch: preview/draft work.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14678
Summary:
Ref T9132. Fixes T4580. Thhat might actually have been fixed a while ago or something since it describes a buggy/bad interaction which doesn't reproduce for me at HEAD.
This saves and restores all the stacked actions (subscribers, projects, etc) so that you don't lose anything if you close a window by accident.
Test Plan:
Added a bunch of actions in various states, reloaded the page, draft stuck around.
Submitted form, actions didn't stick around anymore.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T4580, T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14675
Summary: Ref T9132. I can't actually get rid of the EditController yet since a few weird things still use it, but I think I can swap this button out without breaking anything. This will let us do "New Feature Request" / "New Bug" / "Advanced Task Creation" on secure and start playing with this stuff sooner.
Test Plan: Clicked "Create Task", got sent to new form.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14673
Summary:
Ref T9132. We currently have an old preview/draft behavior and a new actions behavior.
Let the actions behavior do drafts/previews too, so we can eventually throw away the old thing.
This is pretty much just copying the old behavior into the new one, but with a few tweaks. The major change is that we submit all the stacked actions behavior now, so the preview reflects everything the change will do (and, soon, we can save it in the draft in a consistent way).
Also includes one hack-fix that I'll clean up at some point.
Test Plan: Added a bunch of stacked actions and observed meaningful previews.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14672
Summary:
Ref T9132. Open to discussion here since it's mostly product stuff, but here's my gut on this:
- Change Maniphest behavior to stop assigning tasks if they're unassigned when closed. I think this behavior often doesn't make much sense. We'll probably separately track "who closed this" in T4434 eventually.
- Only add the actor as a subscriber if they comment, like in other applications. Previously, we added them as a subscriber for other types of changes (like priority and status changes). This is more consistent, but open to retaining the old behavior or some compromise between the two.
- Retain the "when changing owner, subscribe the old owner" behavior.
Test Plan:
- Added a comment, got CC'd.
- Changed owners, saw old owner get CC'd.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14670
Summary:
Ref T9132. This is kind of a mess because the tokenizer rewrite left rendering tokenizers in Javascript a little rough. This causes bugs like icons not showing up on tokens in the "Policy" dialog, which there's a task for somewhere I think.
I think I've fixed it enough that the beahavior is now correct (i.e., icons show up properly), but some of the code is a bit iffy. I'll eventually clean this up properly, but it's fairly well contained for now.
Test Plan:
- Reassigned a task.
- Put a task up for grabs.
- No reassign on closed tasks.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14669
Summary: Ref T9132. Supports selects in stacked actions and adds "Change Status" + "Change Priority".
Test Plan: Changed status and priority from stacked actions.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14667
Summary:
Ref T9132. Only allow a task to have a single owner in the UI.
In Conduit, make this field appear and behave as "phid" instead of "list<phid>".
Test Plan: Edited a task with new fancy form, got limited to one owner. Assigned/unassigned. Used Conduit to assign/unassign.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14666
Summary: Ref T9132. This makes the "Quote" action on comments work properly in these applications.
Test Plan: Quoted text in each application.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14665
Summary: Ref T9132. Shhh this never happened shhhhhhh.
Test Plan: Selected multiple actions, saw them add at the bottom.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14664
Summary:
Ref T9132. Like D14659, I'll hold this until after the cut.
This swaps commenting in Maniphest over to EditEngine / stackable actions. New code doesn't have parity yet, although none of the things we're missing should technically be //strictly mandatory//. There's a list inline. I'll restore these in the next diffs.
Briefly -- comments, subscribers and projects work. Status, owners and priority do not yet.
Test Plan:
- Made comments and added subscribers and projects.
- Read through the old code to look for missing features and tried to document them all.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14663
Summary:
Ref T9132. I'm going hold this until after the release cut since it isn't going to land completely smoothly, but I think I can prep it today/tomorrow and hopefully get it close enough to working to put in HEAD on Saturday after the push.
This adds the basics: new EditEngine, new EditController, and new `maniphest.edit` API endpoint.
I put the new stuff at `editpro/` for now until it works a little better.
Some notes on stuff this is dropping/changing/not-working-yet:
- Preview for the description. I'd rather solve this by putting a "Preview" button on every Remarkup area if we want to retain it. Particularly, it does not generalize to adding custom remarkup fields in its current form. See also T3967.
- Per-field policies are no longer enforced. They were never truly enforced anyway (for example, any user who can edit a task has always been able to edit every field via Conduit or email actions or Herald, where Herald supports things), and only really served as a hint to users. I think we can obsolete this by having installs hide/lock these fields instead. This is a desirable outcome for me, since I don't like retaining these policies and the idea of truly enforcing them properly is worrisome. These were originally added for Uber as an onboarding sort of thing. I'll prepare users for this in greater detail in the documentation.
- Couple of minor bugs with ordering / defaults / only-one-owner-allowed in this diff that I'll clean up in future diffs before this stuff lands.
- I don't have a concrete plan on "Create Similar Task" / "Clone" yet (do you have thoughts? Is this worth trying to do in every application?). I'll probably just mostly mimic the current behavior.
Test Plan: I'll vet this more thoroughly in followups, just banged around some tasks for now and created/edited via the API.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9132
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14659
Summary: Provides a real 2x avatar and offers new built in images for profile pictures.
Test Plan: reload profile, see sharper image, pick eevee, see eevee
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14668
Summary: Use Profile Image, remove skin, show domain info better, add New Post button. Ref T9897
Test Plan: Test new buttons, see new images.
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9897
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14671
Summary: Updates some internal builtin image defaults for 2x, and adds some new ones for profiles
Test Plan: View my profile, still works
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14661
Summary: Make this function re-usable in other views. Ref T9897
Test Plan: View a blog, see the same information
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T9897
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14658
