Just as a data point, the Wikimedia community is a user of git's .mailmap support for our repositories as it gives repository owners/committers a way to clean things up unilaterally (instead of pushing the work on the individual authors who may or may not be contactable anymore). I was reminded of this after seeing a recent cleanup .mailmap commit in our operations/puppet repository: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/282405/

That's my expectation too -- the user cycles their "2012 Hackathon Winner" badge out for "2013 Easter Egg Finder" once they get bored of it, so badges are always fresh and lookin' fly.

I expect every user to have millions of participation badges. Yet they'll have to select just two to prominently display.

I'm struggling with how to think about the 'temporal' nature of some peer awards that might fit badges. For example, I'd like to give the team that won the popular vote at a hackathon, but it would not feel so special if after a year "everyone" had an Epic badge displayed all the time. I'm thinking more "you get celebrated for a month" and less "list of all the typos I found 3 year ago".

This isn't a bug, there are just no fields available.

I would take great delight in using such a tool

I would use it to give Chad a new hand-drawn picture every day.

I would probably use that for every new team member that was still using the default/bad picture after some time.

Particularly, I like that it allows users who are feeling the most pain (e.g., triager or PM types) to gently pressure users to bother doing setup properly by suggesting awful pictures, or do the legwork and suggest good ones.

Would anyone else use "Suggest a picture for another user" if we built it (T4104)? I think this feature is hilarious/social/fun/easy but maybe I'm alone in that.

seriously though, I think this is really good idea; I'm not sure if it would help if registering via oauth (And getting the default oauth provider image).

721 pokemon x lots of colors.

nux "select profile image" interstitial?

After extensive testing, with help from @avivey on IRC, we discovered this actually wasn't caused by a deleted user - that had cleaned up just fine. It appears to be a new Projects related bug. See T10168: Provide a clearer pathway forward for old projects with invalid hashtags.

I think we fixed this elsewhere, yell if it's still an issue.

• I believe username association works correctly.
• Assigning an email is already mandatory when creating a bot:

You should definitely follow up on the other task with your use cases. Ideally we want to group many similar feature requests so we can architect a single system to cover all or most needs. As that task is still being planned, it's better to comment on it now so those needs can be factored in.

We don't advertise our site except to people who are in the field, but we do still get spammers; probably about 1-2 attempted registrations per month on average. So far I think we've managed to catch them all in the approval process, usually by vetting the e-mail address.

I mentioned anticipated because you mentioned catching spammers with such a tool. Is this actively happening? We're probably the largest (by user reg) open install, and haven't had any spam concerns. If it's a problem, then that should be a different ticket.

Not sure why you think the above describes an anticipated problem. To be clear, this is an actual problem that we have today (and have had pretty much since Day 1 when we adopted Phabricator, but we hoped the addition of the Spaces module would help solve it).

Please see Requesting Features for how to request features in Phabricator. Specifically we're interested in the core problem you are having day to not, and not anticipated problems.

Does committing as botusername <anything@anything> definitely not work?

I would be please to help and do it right (this time).

Do it have notifications or hook for email or slack?

Ignoring the actual invite workflow for now, the major technical issue with supporting this is handling the eventual merging of accounts.

Yep, @epriestley has nailed the scenario exactly. I'd like use of Phabricator to spread organically (hopefully virally) through the org. That makes user commitment to it much stronger - and it gives me a measure of how enthusiastic people are about the tools and whether we should commit to it.

You can just type 500 email addresses into this box (and, at least locally, it works fine, although admittedly I haven't done it in production personally):

I think that @oliver.fisher's use-case - this ticket and T9297 has more to do with initial on-boarding to Phacility/Phabricator, and bulk-creation of accounts.

I'm not familiar with @oliver.fisher's case or the numerous situations that Phabricator would need to account for, but this problem sounded relate-able to ones we've come across in the past.

Closing for lack of feedback.

Why do you care about this information?