T5701 describes a strategy for Pygments styles. I don't think we should tackle that as an accessibility issue, but I think building it as a user preference issue is reasonable.

If you configure your project so that arc unit runs your tests and then make your Buildkite build run arc unit --everything --target $HARBORMASTER_TARGET_PHID --conduit-token ..., you should get full reporting support. Then arc unit on its own will also work, arc diff will get the same integration, etc.

hiding policy controls when creating panels in context of the Arrange Panels page seems like a good way to minimize this

No idea if realistic, but what if this "feature" is only enabled on installs of less than 6 months (or with the right db schema or something)?

Those seem to have been the magic words:

Panels can currently appear on multiple dashboards, so we can't use the dashboard's policy for them directly. If we could, you could always see any panel by creating a new dashboard you have permission to see, adding every panel to it, and looking at the panel you wanted.

The LocationsResource file is completely copy/pasted and wrong (still refers to "Instances").

I think the complexity of those rules exceeds their utility.

Base scenario should create the appropriate edge tables.

And phabricator.developer-mode and phabricator.developer-mode and phabricator.developer-mode and also phabricator.show-prototypes.

We should suggest configuring phabricator.developer-mode and phabricator.developer-mode (for UIExamples, to see icons).

I suppose that I'm being lazy, but the exact same argument exists for arc close-revision or arc upload.

The db001 issue is still an issue, but the shard has managed to stay just under 80% for the last couple of weeks so we're not in any immediate peril. As followups, I think T12217 and T12218 better capture the broader issues here.

We haven't received any more information about this in a little more than two weeks, and don't know how to reproduce it so we can't move forward. Feel free to file a new task if you're able to come up with reproduction steps which work in a clean environment.

I think there are some more things worth doing here, but user profiles should be significantly more clear after recent changes. Here's @demo on this install now:

Oh we already had one of these

Presuming this is resolved since it's extremely boring and I ran it here and on every instance in the production cluster last week without any issues, but yell if you run into problems.

Presuming this is resolved since we haven't seen any evidence otherwise, but feel free to file followups if you run into issues or limitations.

We haven't received information that lets us reproduce this in about a week.

I scratched at the surface of T2794, but @chad also bought me a larger monitor so I can put more SSH terminals on it which should buy us another few weeks.

• Why do you track "percent complete"? What do you use it for?
• Is it actually accurate? Developers are notoriously bad at estimating project timelines, so I would naively guess that a "Percent" field would have almost no relationship to reality.

D17333 is a probable fix without needing to resort to a bunch of weird setInterval() juggling. I've pushed that here, let me know if you're still seeing the issue? If you are, does your JS console have anything in it?

Other than implementing arc commandeer, can you suggest two different ways we could solve the problem you're running into?

I'm having some trouble reproducing this -- I tried Safari and Chrome here and in my sandbox. You aren't using anything weird, right?

At some point, it's starting to be a lot of noise in the project, so we dup all these reports against the task tracking the root cause.

From a technical standpoint, we did not record these relationships in a normalized way prior to D16196 (June 2016, about 7 months ago) -- they only existed in the transaction log, and we just wrote a "close", extra_data="as duplicate of X" transaction that can't be queried efficiently.

We could also implement "Mute Thread" in Phabricator, but I assume no one would be willing to click twice to mute a thread.

If we use SMTP envelope To, doesn't Alice potentially get multiple messages still (envelope "To: Alice", envelope "To: All-About-Alice@lists.company.com")? The list rewrites the envelope to go to all the list members, right? Or is there more magic there I don't know about?

One issue with one-mail-per-recipient is that gmail does not permit muting an email conversation if you are the only TO recipient.

T11050 describes a way you could work around this issue in some cases in the future, by resigning from the review (basically, saying "I'm not going to review this on behalf of Project 1 because user B is on top of it, so get it out of my queue"). That doesn't help if you want it in your queue but just not in the "Must Review" bucket.

Thanks for the report, and for including detailed reproduction steps. The were very helpful in reproducing and fixing this issue.

If you want to implement the rest of it with a ( trigger I can counter-diff you for a (( trigger.

(D17331 should fix the outdated discussion of the option in Config.)

In the specific case of Phurl autocompletion, I'd be happy to review a change if someone wants to tackle it. The recent emoji autocompletion is probably a pretty good example to start from.

(It's still not possible to name a link X | Y, but I think we're no longer aware of any reasonable cases where this is important.)

I belive this was effectively resolved by changes connected to T7691. Specifically, if you had a page titled "A" at location "x", you previously needed to type [[ x | A ]] to get it to render the right link text. If you omitted the ... | A ... part, the link would just be named x.

In T5301#210596, @DemiMarie wrote:

What about triple backticks in code blocks? Code blocks can contain
anything, so I consider not being able to put three consecutive backticks
in them a bug.

Commentary on this is welcome, even just to say no it won't fly.

I think this is the same as T11543 but I'm going to merge that here since this one is a little cleaner. My current thinking:

haha good 🐱 👍

I imagine that the rest of the process will work like this:

AWS got back to me with essentially a form response that didn't address any of the particulars of our case.

For starters, this regex fails to work

Sometimes people will "Reply All" and everyone will get two mails, one from the user and one from Phabricator turning their mail into a comment.

To jump back further, the root-ier cause is that you're using mailing lists?

Oh, I didn't even realize that was a thing. I assumed SMTP went like "okay here is a message: <message body>".

Here is a picture from this morning but she was a little confused that we were wasting time taking pictures (boring) instead of going straight to daycare.

Or, more generally, if we send two mails:

I think you don't need to rebuild the search index for that to take full effect. Although rebuilding it will change the content in the index in some cases, the new, more-tailored queries should match either version.

We transform x y into +"x" +"y" in the general case, but currently apply stemming to "a_b" and "c.d". This is because it's generally correct to stem "x-y", which is usually a hyphenated English phrase rather than a "constant" or "token", and correct to stem "z.", which is usually something copy-pasted with a stray period, not an intent to search for a token ending with a period, and the cases of "_" and "." got lumped in with those.

• We no longer send normal mail to unverified addresses. Consequently, mail sent between creating an account and that user verifying their address (for example, assigning them tasks) is now dropped.
• We no longer send "sorry, we ignored your mail because we don't recognize the address" replies if we don't recognize the sender, unless phabricator.allow-email-users is set.
  • I would like to eventually (post-Nuance?) remove this option, stop allowing "email users", and move away from "grey users".
• We no longer send a misleading error about "no default user" if an application address is not configured with a default user.
• This install now delivers outbound mail through Mailgun instead of SES.
• The queued backlog appears to have flushed.

Unfortunately, this is so far afield from our roadmap that we don't have room for this year, even under paid prioritization.

• I think this sends the recipients many copies of the email, particularly if they are on mailing lists? Why do you believe that users will receive only one copy of the mail if we send ten messages with their address in "To"?
• Are you sure "Reply-To" overrides "Reply All" in all major clients? I haven't tested this personally, but I can't immediately find any references to this behavior on Google. I believe we already use "Reply-To", so I would expect "Reply All" to already be a non-problem if "Reply-To" overrode it. My pre-existing belief was that "Reply-To" replaced only "From", not the entire recipient list, under "Reply All".

A sub-issue here is that we're bouncing a lot of email like this, for an exciting product called "Penisole" from reputable domain "bloggay.com":

Add some kind of notification to user accounts like "some email you would have been sent was dropped because you haven't verified your address yet"?

My plan here is:

My guess is that this is just something dumb and mostly out of our control, and we fell through the cracks because the email volume we send from this install is tiny. We sent 41,877 messages in January at a cost of $0.00 -- this is too few messages to even qualify for charges, which start once you send 2,000 messages in a single day.

Yeah: if it's important to identify duplicates because you use duplicates as a priority signal, making it easier to see a list of duplicates on the task detail isn't a very powerful approach.

In T12237#211025, @epriestley wrote:

Although I'm somewhat confused by this because it came to the address for my personal AWS account.

I appealed this, but the FAQ says "Due to the way spamtrap sending is reported, it will take a minimum of three weeks before we can confirm that a fix you have put in place has succeeded.".

@chad, just to make sure my ducks are in a row, you aren't using noreply@phabricator.com in association with any marketing mail, right? I don't want to claim "we only send transactional mail" if that isn't true.

SES is definitely rejecting mail, though:

Although I'm somewhat confused by this because it came to the address for my personal AWS account.

Revisions in the "Needs Revision" state (i.e., following the reject in step (2)) should never appear in "Must Review". I think the steps are missing a step "2a", where the author updates the revision with new changes?

Why is it important to see all the duplicates at a glance?

There's currently no way to query that, since the dashboardPHID is in a JSON blob in the PhabricatorProfileMenuItemConfiguration table.

T12233 is an essentially identical case, although it discusses other analogous use cases (hide/shrink "Audits" if empty; hide/shrink "Reviews" if empty).

I just dropped her off at daycare but I will submit proof that she is alive and unharmed after I pick her up this evening.

See Planning for help on status and timelines.

From elsewhere, it would also be nice if this tokenizer highlighted instance members of instances associated with the billing account. There isn't a straightforward way to determine which "joe" or whatever is correct right now that works better than "ask Joe what his account name is".

In T12232#210902, @yelirekim wrote:

Yeah I clicked "Delete File" and can't see it anywhere now.