Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enough
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by epriestley on Apr 11 2017, 4:52 PM.

Details

Reviewers

Commits

rPf624c8238123: (stable) Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enough
rPaf1d494d66e9: Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enough

Summary

Previously, "reject" and "reject older" were separate statuses. Now, they're both shades of "reject".

Set the "older reject" flag properly when we find a non-current reject.

Test Plan

User A accepts a revision.
User B rejects it.
Author updates it.
Before patch: incorrectly transitions to "accepted" ("older" reject is ignored).
After patch: correctly transitions to "needs review".

Diff Detail

Repository

rP Phabricator

Branch

reject1

Lint

Lint Passed

Unit

Tests Passed

Build Status

Buildable 16388
Build 21799: Run Core Tests
Build 21798: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

epriestley created this revision.Apr 11 2017, 4:52 PM

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B16388: Diff 42458.Apr 11 2017, 4:53 PM

chad accepted this revision.Apr 11 2017, 4:54 PM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Apr 11 2017, 4:54 PM

Closed by commit rPaf1d494d66e9: Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enough (authored by epriestley, committed by epriestley). · Explain WhyApr 11 2017, 4:54 PM

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

epriestley mentioned this in T12496: "differential.sticky-accept" isn't working because of overbroad accept downgrading.Apr 21 2017, 3:29 PM

Revision Contents
Changeset List

Path

Size

src/

applications/

differential/

editor/

DifferentialTransactionEditor.php

2 lines

Diff 42458

View Options

src/applications/differential/editor/DifferentialTransactionEditor.php

Fix an issue where rejecting reviewers weren't powerful enoughClosedPublicActions