Page MenuHomePhabricator

Allow "Repository Automation" to be configured for repositories
ClosedPublic

Authored by epriestley on Oct 12 2015, 10:48 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F13096301: D14259.id34424.diff
Thu, Apr 25, 3:58 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 25, 12:03 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Apr 19, 3:44 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 11, 11:22 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 11, 8:20 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sun, Apr 7, 7:23 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 4 2024, 6:34 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 4 2024, 6:34 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

Ref T182. This allows you to assign blueprints that a repository can use to perform working copy operations. Eventually, this will support "merge this" in Differential, etc.

This is just UI for now, with no material effects.

Most of this diff is just taking logic that was in the existing "Blueprints" CustomField and putting it in more general places so Diffusion (which does not use CustomFields) can also access it.

Test Plan
  • Configured repository automation for a repository.
  • Removed repository automation for a repository.

Diff Detail

Repository
rP Phabricator
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

epriestley retitled this revision from to Allow "Repository Automation" to be configured for repositories.
epriestley updated this object.
epriestley edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
epriestley added a reviewer: chad.
chad edited edge metadata.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Oct 13 2015, 3:46 PM

Maybe we can name this "Working Copy Blueprint", to be more specific?

I anticipate this section eventually having more configuration (policies, merge strategies, which branches can be targets?). The phrase "repository automation" isn't a perfect fit for "stuff to make a 'land button' work", but I think it will make more sense after release and deployment hooks become available (roughly, the stuff in T9530) and some of these processes really are more along the lines of automation.

I wouldn't mind finding a better term for this, but wasn't able to come up with one. The only problem I really have with it is that it isn't very self-explanatory: when you read it for the first time, you probably can't guess what it means. But the size of the idea seems about right (big enough to accommodate future changes, small enough that it can be explained in one sentence without requiring you to understand Drydock first), and the term doesn't seem confusing or misleading or overloaded to me.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.