what is audit.can-author-close-audit set to?

Oh I see, you don't even want Accept as an option, regardless of if it doesn't close or not?

In T5928#6, @chad wrote:

Oh I see, you don't even want Accept as an option, regardless of if it doesn't close or not?

Correct. audit.can-author-close-audit: false

I went spelunking to see if I could change this myself and ran into this comment: https://secure.phabricator.com/diffusion/P/browse/master/src/applications/diffusion/controller/DiffusionCommitController.php;a46d1f1cd88340c6fb550488e6c405fce3e4c81d$852

Yeah, that workflow is something we support, and I've used in the past. We want to support people "doing the right thing" and "not getting in the way with lots of process". That is, you're welcome to create whatever process you want for your company, but Phabricator tries to be as vanilla as possible. As long as audit.can-author-close-audit is false, nothing is breaking your process, correct, or are people getting confused?

Nothing is broken per se, it's just confusing people. Some are interpreting it to mean "I fixed the problem" in response to someone raising a concern.

FWIW epriestley in chat also seemed to think it was confusing and it would be nice if Differential and Audit behaved similar with these things.

I want to align these workflows more closely with the workflows in Differential. In particular, I want to introduce a "Needs Verification" state (T2393) and maybe add a "this is known broken, sorry, my bad, fixing it" state to deal with the case linked above.