I don't understand what this feature is or how it would work, but users are adamant that they want it:
I think pictures are part of a "story"? We can have users upload pictures and take pictures with phones. There doesn't seem to be a native CLI way to get Macbooks to take photos but we can make users brew install imagesnap, it seems, and then arc could update stories.
Does anyone actually use the "Stories" feature in one of the other things that implements it (Excel, Settings.app, Disk Recovery Utility, etc)? Why is it compelling?
Why do users view other users' stories instead of spending that time looking at /r/prequelmemes? (Or: does no one actually read stories, and this is purely about publishing?)
Why do stories vanish after 24 hours if they're being used to produce a photo album of a fun camping trip with your friends like the Snapchat blog post suggests? (Or: are they actually all just sex stuff? Snapchat is like 95% sex stuff and 5% brand advertisements, right?)
If there's any good content in this feature at all, why do I never see it reposted to Reddit or Facebook or Twitter? Are Reddit and Twitter just for old people now?
In my view, Stories products encourage out-of-band collaboration where the original product falls short. For example Instagram has a "best self forward" impression that causes users to artificially constrain posting. Instagram Stories combats this with its ephemerality and whimsy. It's a "back door" without having to fix the root problems in the main product.
By that logic, Phabricator Stories should encourage code discussions in places where formal code reviews are failing — perhaps they are too slow, or people are afraid to have appropriately honest discussions because everything is permanent, or the bar for getting something into a review is high and that artificially constrains the conversations we could be having about code that never gets committed. I'm sure there are other things we could improve.
In this framework, Stories should be about code, not photos. But we could also introduce filters to make your code look better than it really is.
@phillco - Is this for like, seeing code reviews that haven't had active participation in while? So users could see what's not being reviewed and lend a hand? Under the assumption that the "most-qualified" stakeholders (or Owners?) are already reviewers/subscribers of a code change but aren't being active, how effective would others' review be?
It sounds like the idea is to make "active work" be more discoverable. It sounds interesting, but not sure what immediate benefits are.