Summary:
Fixes T9427. Currently, replies to audits/commits go to "Cxxx", but so do replies to countdowns.
There is non real non-disruptive approach available here and this seems least-bad.
Test Plan:
- Made a comment on a commit.
- Fished the reply-to address out of `bin/mail list-oubound` + `bin/mail show-outbound` (it was now "COMMIT...").
- Sent mail to that address.
- Grabbed the raw message and wrote it to `mail.txt`.
- Ran `cat mail.txt | ./scripts/mail/mail_handler.php --process-duplicates`.
- Used `bin/mail list-inbound` + `bin/mail show-inbound` to verify receipt.
- Saw comment appear on audit.
Reviewers: chad
Reviewed By: chad
Maniphest Tasks: T9427
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D14163
Summary:
Fixes T7199. This still isn't a shining example of perfect code, but the raw amount of copy/paste is much lower than it used to be.
- Reduce code duplication between existing receivers.
- Expose receiving objects in help menus where appropriate.
- Connect some "TODO" receivers.
Test Plan:
- Sent mail to every supported object type.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12249
Summary: Ref T7199. Half of these aren't even reachable, but make some progress toward reducing the amount of nonsense and garbage in mail handling.
Test Plan: Tested all reachable handlers with `bin/mail receive-test`.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12237
Summary:
Ref T7199. These were a bad idea which got copy-pasted a bunch.
- There is zero reason to ever set these to different things.
- Unsurprisingly, I don't know of any install which has them set to different things.
Unless I've completely forgotten about it, this option was not motivated by some obscure business need, it was just a bad decision which didn't catch anyone's attention at the time.
We partially remedied the mistake at some point by introducing `metamta.reply-handler-domain`, which works as a default for all applications, but never cleaned this mess up.
Test Plan: Sent some mail from applications, verified it picked up appropraite reply handler domains.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12231
Summary:
Ref T7199. Although this is useful for discovery, it's un-useful enough that we already have an option to disable it, and most applications do not provide any meaningful instructions.
Throwing it away makes it easier to move forward and lets us get rid of a config option.
This is becoming a more advanced/power-user feature anyway, and the new syntax will be significantly more complex and hard to explain with a one-liner. I'm currently thinking that I'll maybe make the "help" menu a dropdown and give it some options like:
+---+
| O |
+---+---------------------+
| Maniphest Documentation |
| Maniphest Email Actions |
+-------------------------+
Then you click the "Email Actions" thing and get a runtime-derived list of available options. Not sure if I'll actually build that, but I think we can fairly throw the in-mail instructions away even if we don't go in that specific direction.
Test Plan: Grepped for `replyHandlerInstructions`, got no hits.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7199
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D12229
Summary: Fixes T7088. Mainly this updates the documentation but I also snuck in tweaking how the domain reply handler is built. This does two main things -- makes the behavior consistent as some applications who didn't override this behavior would send out emails with reply tos AND makes it easier for us to deprecate the custom domain thing on a per application basis, which is just silly. On that note, the main documentation doesn't get into how this can be overridden, though I left in that mini blurb on the config setting itself. We could deprecate this harder and LOCK things if you want as well.
Test Plan: read docs, looked good. reasoned through re-factor
Reviewers: epriestley
Reviewed By: epriestley
Subscribers: Korvin, epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T7088
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D11725
Summary: Ref T4896. This converts the last "CommentEditor" to a transaction editor and removes a large part of the old code.
Test Plan:
- Added comments.
- Accepted / added auditors.
- Added inline comments.
Reviewers: joshuaspence, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4896
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10128
Summary: Ref T4896. Invoke the new editor directly instead of in a roundabout way when handling Audit email.
Test Plan: Used `bin/mail receive-test` to simulate mail, saw comment post with proper content source.
Reviewers: joshuaspence, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4896
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10127
Summary:
Ref T4896. Move the write for "Add Auditors" inside the new Editor.
There are no longer any readers or writers for metadata, so remove the calls for it.
Test Plan: Added auditors from the web UI.
Reviewers: joshuaspence, btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4896
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10123
Summary:
Ref T4896. Depends on D10023. Prepares the code for the final migration.
The transaction table stores one row per distinct effect (e.g., add CCs) rather than one row per user action (e.g., "add CCs + comment"). We can double-read that table as long as the code doesn't expect transactions/comments to have multiple different effects, and doesn't try to write any such rows.
Everywhere that we were writing a big "X + Y" comment, write two separate "X" and "Y" comments instead. Like D10023, this disrupts the UI a little (you get more boxes), but that will be resolved once the rendering code swaps over. Otherwise, this retains the existing behavior.
Test Plan:
- Used `diffusion.createcomment` to add comments, raise concern, and accept.
- Previewed commenting, adding auditors/ccs, accepting, raising concern.
- Actually performed commenting, adding auditors/ccs, accepting, raising concern.
- Added a user with mentions.
- Added an explicit CC and a mention user.
Reviewers: btrahan, joshuaspence
Reviewed By: joshuaspence
Subscribers: epriestley
Maniphest Tasks: T4896
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D10052
Summary: Ref T5655. Some discussion in D9839. Generally speaking, `Phabricator{$name}Application` is clearer than `PhabricatorApplication{$name}`.
Test Plan:
# Pinned and uninstalled some applications.
# Applied patch and performed migrations.
# Verified that the pinned applications were still pinned and that the uninstalled applications were still uninstalled.
# Performed a sanity check on the database contents.
Reviewers: btrahan, epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Reviewed By: epriestley, #blessed_reviewers
Subscribers: hach-que, epriestley, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T5655
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D9982
Summary: Ran `arc lint --apply-patches --everything` over rP, mainly to change double quotes to single quotes where appropriate. These changes also validate that the `ArcanistXHPASTLinter::LINT_DOUBLE_QUOTE` rule is working as expected.
Test Plan: Eyeballed it.
Reviewers: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Reviewed By: #blessed_reviewers, epriestley
Subscribers: epriestley, Korvin, hach-que
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D9431
Summary: This "Reply to comment, etc., etc." section got lost along the way at some point. Restore it for transaction mail.
Test Plan: Received mail from Maniphest with reply instructions.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
Subscribers: epriestley
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D8700
Summary:
Moves all remaining mail handling into ReplyHandlers.
Farewell, `getPhabricatorToInformation()`! You were a bad method and no one liked you.
Ref T1205.
Test Plan:
- Used test console to send mail to Revisions, Tasks, Conpherences and Commits (these all actually work).
- Used test console to send mail to Requests, Macros, Questions and Mocks (these accept the mail but don't do anything with it, but didn't do anything before either).
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1205
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5953
Summary: This doesn't do anything, but touches a bunch of files so I split it out to reduce the size of the next diff. Basically, make `MailReceiver` classes responsible for loading their application objects. Ref T1205.
Test Plan: Inspection / next diff / code is not reached.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1205
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5941
Summary:
Ref T1205. Continuation of D5915.
Currently, `PhabricatorMetaMTAReceivedMail` has //all// the logic for routing mail. In particular:
- New mail receivers in applications must edit it.
- Mail receivers don't drop out when applications are uninstalled.
Applications have some logic in subclasses of `PhabricatorMailReplyHandler`, but this class is a bit of a mess. It is also heavily based on the assumption that mail receivers are objects (like revisions), but this is not true in at least two cases today (creating new tasks with `bugs@`, creating a new Conpherence thread) and likely other cases in the future (e.g., revision-by-mail).
Move this logic into a new `PhabricatorMailReceiver` classtree. This is similar to `PhabricatorMailReplyHandler` but a bit cleaner and more general. I plan to heavily reduce the responsibilities of `PhabricatorMailReplyHandler` or possibly eliminate it entirely.
For now, the new classtree doesn't do much of interest. The only behavioral change this diff causes is that Phabricator will now reject mail to an application when that application is uninstalled.
I also moved all the `ReplyHandler` classes into `mail/` directories in their respective applications.
Test Plan: Unit tests, used receive test to route mail to various objects.
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: Afaque_Hussain, edward, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T1205
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5922
