@epriestley all other commits that have the message "This commit has been deleted in the repository: it is no longer reachable from any branch, tag, or ref." have imported, so I don't think the reachable code is working correctly, as until within the last few weeks I wasn't seeing these "This commit has been deleted in the repository: it is no longer reachable from any branch, tag, or ref." commits showing up, but now I see them all the time.

The commit cache should be a fairly large performance win.

Ah, okay. This is the relevant part:

@epriestley
https://test-3uoifmrptebb.phacility.com/R2:80233a27d7b72bb03710d358e12a531ce46808a9

Starting with repository update:

My impression is that there is a lot of room for optimization in the RepositoryPullLocalDaemon. I've wanted to tackle that for a while because it causes a fair delay between when a commit goes into git and when it actually shows up in Diffusion.

@epriestley The import has finished, but some commits show as importing still?

There's also a bunch of the usual free-tier shenanigans on this host -- free instances with 1 user importing multiple large repositories -- but that's to be expected.

Hi I recently started experimenting with phabricator with my team and stumbled on this issue.

The in-diff issue is described in T11482.

We once rendered these renames like this:

new/path/to/file.c
  Moved From: old/path/to/file.c

Personally I like that, I think a compromise to make it easier to consume, would be to try and group the moves together and showing the relation, for example
now:

a ->
b ->
a <-
b <-

to

a ->
a <-
b ->
b <-

I'm not sure I understand what changes you're suggesting.

closed per user request

@epriestley Please close this task (I can't).

Thanks, this should now be fixed in HEAD of master. Let us know if you run into anything else.

"Bizarro Gremlin" is just an alias for Quicksand

i'm bad at search

I would imagine they're using something along those lines yes. I think we'll probably keep a bunch of people happy if pushing Git refs up were supported.

I'm just curious how people are generating diffs, just command line then cut and paste? I would presume those users would be fine with pushing a branch up for review. Are there other methods we're not considering, like IDEs?

Chances are we're going to get complaints that go either way. Myself, i'd tend to prefer T5000.

You would prefer this over T5000?

We've had some people in KDE kick up some fuss about this.

This is from a million years ago and I now think we should only respect commit messages. If "Fixes Txxx" works or ever worked in comments, I'd say we should actually undo that.

This is more than two years old and no one else seems to have hit it since then. Declining until we see a modern report.

This report is more than two years old, and we haven't seen other similar reports. If you are still affected by this bug, please file a new request following the guidelines in Contributing Bug Reports. In particular, we need specific reproduction instructions we can follow to reproduce it locally, not just screenshots.

We haven't seen more interest in this since 2012 and this task no longer meets modern criteria for feature requests (see Contributing Feature Requests).

Kicking this out of scope for now.

@epriestley That's fair, I'll see what I can do.

Because of the complexity of building a reproduction case and high chance that this is a wild goose chase, we'll move forward with this after a community member confirms it reproduces for them. See T12134 for some discussion. See T12129 for a similar recent report which was a time-consuming wild goose chase.

In T10691#203011, @epriestley wrote:

I think most of these changes are independently good, at least, but supporting this practice is largely handing users rope so they can shoot themselves in the feet.

@epriestley Not that it will likely make you feel any better about it, but some of us just really want our Guns-Made-From-Rope™ to be powered by Phabricator instead of other much less awesome things. 😄

In T12163#208938, @epriestley wrote:

sorry that our DEEP NEURAL NETWORK TECHNOLOGY can not yet READ MINDS

I'm just going to rename Differential everywhere.

sorry that our DEEP NEURAL NETWORK TECHNOLOGY can not yet READ MINDS

typeaheads are useless

(I think this only impacts Diffusion, not Differential.)

I'm going to merge this into T12164, which I think is a more powerful approach on this.

I can't reproduce this. It's possible that you actually experienced T11165 and misremembered exactly what you'd done, or performed one edit in a tab with the other tab open.