For what its worth, the biggest violators at my company tend to be company executives who (sometimes) rightfully wish to skirt our process. But, when they see how trivial it is to skirt our process, they're tempted to do it more often. And then they do it more often.

It's not causing enough pain for me to jump up and down about this. Thank you for clarifying @epriestley!

At my company, every revision has a corresponding branch, which, when pushed to our origin remote, kicks off a CircleCI build.

Excellent point, thanks for clarifying.

I'd be curious how important it is to the project to maintain UI consistency between Herald and Maniphest. Currently leaving the field blank in Maniphest places the task up for grabs -- wouldn't it be preferable to maintain the same expectations in Herald?

Here's the rule transcript:

Thanks for clarifying.

We have a custom field for "Task type" (feature, bug, etc). Would *love* the ability to use herald with this field.

Definitely fixed, thanks for the fast turnaround.

Will try that tonight, thanks. Just updated yesterday evening.

@epriestley currently running 5485fb8aa9e7f2652c2a15accd7da855d4179c02

Yikes! Thanks!

Hi @nornagon -- would you be willing to post details of you have your "excessive hacks" configured? I would love to have a similar setup at my company.

@calfzhou @g-p-g I have an open pull request for this patch on bluehawk/phabricator-sprint: https://github.com/bluehawk/phabricator-sprint/pull/11