It looks like viewerprojects(), specifically, isn't included in these sources at HEAD.

Are you at HEAD / does this problem still exist on this install?

Given that it looks like you were able to apply a patch locally in T8654 which was available in HEAD in June, I think your client was out of date.

No one should need to follow those instructions, because this patch has been in HEAD since late June.

Can you show me the output of arc version?

One caveat to the above is that loading src/extensions/ may trigger loads of other code through autoloading extended classes. So I'd expect one of three outcomes from the PHUTIL_DISABLE_RUNTIME_EXTENSIONS test:

Interesting. That "load libraries" step is much slower than I'd expect; we see ~5-10ms on this host.

When we generate your first real invoice, add language telling users they can just not pay it if they didn't want to continue service and just forgot to cancel.

Are you telling me the arcanist manpage content depends on the installed plugins ?

Is there a chance to have a man page for arcanist anytime soon?

This has been live for about a month without any followup concerns.

u wot m8 ill +1 u

Does your /maniphest/ look like this?

Select "Tasks" under "Search For".

It's been moving out of Config and into Applications gradually and I want to have ~all of it in Applications eventually, a lot of it just predates Applications.

Remarkup does have multiple rendering modes. There are currently three: email-text (used for text email bodies), email-html (used for html email bodies) and html (used elsewhere).

Broadly, the behavior of fields can not currently be dependent on the repository a revision belongs to.

Yeah, I'm planning to convert the "Clone As" setting to "optional, unique repository name" and use it as an identifier in URIs if it's set.

This is approximately filed as T5307. The workaround right now is:

(The dialog might also be inaccurate if the link was actually on a dashboard panel.)

I could imagine this, purely motivated by flavor:

Yes, but it's real dumb:

One other thing we might want to consider is making "Prototype" more prominent, just in the hope of reducing upstream support burden a little. We could link it to the "Prototype" docs too, perhaps.

A general case of this is:

Ah, I did something wrong earlier and can replicate this in Firefox on OSX (40.0.3).

You should be able to configure this in:

The handling of this error will be improved by T9132.

If there's some way to arrive here without purposefully following a link to it or entering it into the address bar, we'll fix that. Short of that, this is behaving as intended.

This is expected, and working as intended. You can not create objects which you could not view or edit.

This is intentional, and the expected behavior.