Maniphest has a half-complete Subscribers implementation with some old hard-coding. It should be fully modernized.
Pretty much all of the time, I care more about a comment being left than I do about an subscribers being updated. However, because adding a comment also adds a subscriber, I often get "@alincoln updated subscribers of X" notifications rather than "@alincoln commented on X". It seems inconsistent however and sometimes works then other way around.
| Status | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duplicate | None | T5117 Automatically CC users mentioned in a task description like in the comments | ||
| Duplicate | None | T4484 Show Herald effects on objects in object transaction logs | ||
| Open | None | T4968 Change phrasing of "task subscriber added" message | ||
| Resolved | epriestley | T4411 Adding a CC to a Maniphest Task should give View rights for that user | ||
| Resolved | btrahan | T5604 Properly integrate Maniphest with Subscribers | ||
| Resolved | btrahan | T5245 Migrate Maniphest Projects to use edge infrastructure |
The expectation is that the "subscription" will win if it's someone other than the author (argument being: adding someone else as a CC is fairly interesting, at least some of the time), but the "comment" will win if it's the author (argument being: this is essentially never interesting).
Maniphest isn't "really" using subscriptions properly yet, so it doesn't necessarily obey this rule. Audit/Diffusion is behind the times too. Other applications should follow this rule.
That wasn't very clear -- specifically:
I guess I'm primarily talking about maniphest. You (@epriestley) commented on two tickets (T5604 and T5602) and I had two notifications: one update subscribers and one commented.
I'm going to repurpose this since I don't think we have a ticket for swapping to "real" subscribers yet. I think that'll fix things.
T5245 probably isn't a technical blocker but we'll avoid a lot of conflicts by waiting for it since the projects and subscribers code is often adjacent.
Well, maybe not that messy. I think I got away with at least one of these pretty cleanly in the past, since you basically just copy the table into the edge table and theoretically you're about done.
For what is worth, this problem caused confusion among users that were ignoring "updated subscribers" notifications but still could see them in their feeds. It took us a while to realize that these notifications were legit, just misnamed: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76098
There's still some cruft in the codebase here. Mainly the transaction rendering code for the old style transactions. I have to (maybe) fix something similar for projects so if this doesn't look ridiculously bad I'll fix this bit too.
That said, for a user, all the benefits of this task should be there now. Plus probably a few bugs I'll fix as we find them. :D