Thanks, that feedback is helpful.

T9132 gives us more options for accommodating this this without needing to put comment boxes on every edit form.

T9132 has a tangential interaction here: Differential saves action state, as well as comment state, and it would be nice to do this generally. After T9132, any generalization here can reasonably also persist action state in a general way.

We can pursue this cheaply after T9132 and see how it feels.

I think T9132 is the most promising approach for reducing the complexity in exposing transaction writes in a general way.

We could do parts of this prior to T9132, but completing it first gives us much better tools for solving this everywhere, and a realistic chance of building a not-totally-awful resolution UX.

I want to resolve this via T9132, by providing prefilling of all fields in all forms.

I'm going to merge this into T9132, which will provide abstract prefilling of all fields in all forms.

I'm pushing T8442 out since we don't really have enough understanding of use cases yet, and would like to give installs time to adopt and use Spaces before we move forward with it, since there are a number of different possible approaches with different tradeoffs.

Status here:

I think we've pretty much tied up all the loose ends for v1 here.

We have pretty good saturation now and I don't think there are any real-world use cases driving other applications at the moment. A few more applications will probably get support eventually.

This stuff is now in relatively good shape in HEAD. Some followups:

T7739 can use some more work to improve clarity and functionality, but I think everything else here is in reasonable shape now.

Shell completion needs an overhaul anyway (T7488) so that it can work outside of just arc.

I don't imagine this is in v2, but we could build XHPAST in Harbormaster. This would be good for the unfortunate souls that use Windows.

Some of this improved in the meantime; some of it we haven't seen more requests for.

This report doesn't contain enough information to reproduce the issue.

It means running arc unit on a build server.

I don't think there's anything specifically actionable here. If your build server has direct access to the Phabricator database (it never should) I think we get this for free as soon as "lease host + build working copy + run command" is reliable.