I get the sense that most of this discussion is around diffs, but we've been having issues with the default size of 8 showing in code blocks in Phriction causing more wrapping than we would like.

This is approximately coming into existence and this task no longer serves much of a purpose. See T13083 / T13279 for followups.

After D20194, expansion of tabs now uses the correct rule (expand tabs to the next tabstop) instead of the old rule (hard-coded replacement with a fixed number of spaces).

I don't currently plan to make "Disable User" any more granular than it is. If you have a use case where you want multiple administrator levels and to allow administrators at a certain level to act downward but not upward, you might be able to do something like have an enforcer-bot account which users can instruct to disable one another. The enforcer-bot itself could act via the API.

In T9041#240610, @epriestley wrote:

"Disable User", specifically, is now granular.

"Disable User", specifically, is now granular.

Yeah, that was the commit that reminded me how I wanted this. Unfortunately, it looks like the database still stores literal repositoryPHIDs, so the schema would need to change if it were to handle functions (which is why I bumped the ticket instead of taking a stab at implementing it myself first). I figured I'd add my voice to the ticket for now and continue toiling along with complex Herald rules for now.

After D19191 it would be relatively easy to support projects and wildcard functions (like "Any Repository") but there's currently no interest in this from customers.

I don't suppose there's been any interest in adding wildcards/function matchers to Owners in the last couple of years?

We shipped "Mentions" and "Duplicates" some time ago.

Phabricator messes up tab spacing in patches. It should be very easy to replace tabs with spaces and require the use of only monospace fonts.

I'm going to call this effectively resolved:

For me it would be a great enhancement if there would be a shortcut which temporarily toggles this option:
Settings → Personal Settings → APPLICATIONS → Diff Preferences → Show Older Inlines

If a linter could theoretically catch it (conventions, space, formatting, etc.), I think a linter should (in a perfect world) be catching it.

Do you bucket style guide violations with lint issues? While I obviously can't post internal reviews, I can give you a hand-waving indication that a non-zero percentage of comments are style-related things that aren't caught by linters.

Broadly, the technical stuff here is in fairly good shape now but I still don't truly understand what problem we're solving. From earlier, I dug this up:

Thanks, much appreciated! 👍🏻

@chad thanks for sharing your perspective - I will try to share positive feedback as well. Hopefully that will allow the constructive feedback I have to be considered, as I have felt like the feedback and ideas I have shared have often been dismissed or had a very harsh response.

Users can customize their search (like I have below) or you can fork Phabricator to provide a different experience.

Your feedback is continually negative and tone deaf.

@chad I am trying to give constructive feedback to improve the product, including both the pain points and suggested improvements. I am not used to this kind of response to product feedback. It's unfortunate.

You've made it quite clear on multiple occasions Phabricator is a painful product to use for everyone at your company.

Our interest / problems related to this persist. I haven't been vocal as I don't know what else to do other than to share my feedback, but I continue to hear negative feedback internally in our company regarding this issue, per the description above.

This has been open for about two years without a significant amount of additional confusion or interest, so I don't currently plan to change it.

This has seemed stable for a while. We've fixed a few stemming issues and have T12137 and some other followups outstanding, but these generally are not issues that are fundamental to InnoDB Fulltext.

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

No easy way to apply a policy to a group of repos.

In T5000#176440, @epriestley wrote:

Another possibility is that we just build this behavior (intercept and react to ref changes) as an extension point prior to the Herald, and then you can implement whatever magic you want. I suspect very few installs want the default behavior of git push origin mybranch for arbitrarily named branches to be anything except "create a branch".

The underlying issue here is that fields may, in the general case, contain multiple paragraphs, colons, things that look like field headers, and may be line-wrapped. We must parse this as two fields:

Applied D17001 and confirmed fix. Thank you.

> select @@innodb_ft_max_token_size;
ERROR 1193 (HY000): Unknown system variable 'innodb_ft_max_token_size'

What you describe sounds familiar. I can find NTP and EoL. I can find NIS* but not NIS, DNS* but not DNS.

That's expected if innodb_ft_max_token_size is not defined; specifically if this returns an error:

FYI this is where things are at after storage upgrade on Week 49 stable using MariaDB 5.5. Is this what you would expect?

Note that full text indexing for InnoDB and hence innodb_ft_min_token_size were only introduced in MariaDB 10.0.5. RHEL/CentOS 7 ships with MariaDB 5.5 :( Ref: https://mariadb.com/kb/en/mariadb/fulltext-index-overview/

Found it and edited my comment, it was indeed innodb_ft_min_token_size at fault.

What is innodb_ft_min_token_size set to? The default is 3.

After this update I couldn't find three letter words any more. I needed to add this change to the MySQL config:

@csilvers, not sure if you got directed here from IRC. See also T11932. At HEAD, we'll now issue more explicit guidance about the required index rebuild.

The Croatian letter "č" is also missing, but it's the only Croatian diacritic that's not present in the distributed version of Aleo, resulting in this:

I'll strip restricted handles from the "Mentions" lists.

@epriestley Tasks that are invisible to the user show up in Mentions as "Restricted Task". Is that intentional? In most other places such tasks are simply invisible. It is information leak (even if a very small one) and does not seem to provide any benefit.

I added "Mentions" (and "Mocks") recently in connection with T4788.

I've marked D16806 as resolving this. Once that lands, here's the state of the world in terms of how the product works: