OK, I understand now what is the point

OK, I think I get it

That also doesn't look like a working copy.

I should have checked if there exists a verbose output first :-D
Anyway, here is the output :

14:21 grooveek@anlin ~/Projects/test-phabricator%  arc install-certificate --trace                                                           
 ARGV  '/home/grooveek/Projects/arcanist/bin/../scripts/arcanist.php' 'install-certificate' '--trace'
 LOAD  Loaded "phutil" from "/home/grooveek/Projects/libphutil/src".
 LOAD  Loaded "arcanist" from "/home/grooveek/Projects/arcanist/src".
Config: Did not find user configuration at "/home/grooveek/.arcrc".
Config: Did not find system configuration at "/etc/arcconfig".
Working Copy: No candidate locations for .arcconfig from this working directory.
Working Copy: Path "/home/grooveek/Projects/test-phabricator" is not in any working copy.
Usage Exception: Specify an explicit URI or run this command from within a project which is configured with a .arcconfig.

Great! Yeah, make sure to restart both after upgrading or you can be left running old code against a new schema, as here.

Working Copy: Path "/home/fl.blondeau/NetBeansProjects/namescan-phabricator" is not in any working copy.

@epriestley wow, ok thanks that seemed to work. ( I did restart nginx and phd but clearly not fpm)

Did you restart your webserver after updating? See Restarting Phabricator for help.

Can you try arc install-certificate --trace, and show me the output?

As it says clearly on the home page, this is not a test install - if you want to try something launch a free Phacility test instance.

If there have something to know.

Sorry this isn't a place to test, I quote:

I tried to reproduce your steps :

name

In T3025#181309, @jayvdb wrote:

I saved "Ignore Conflict" here and on phabricator.wikimedia.org , but a few hours later the warning message overlay has reappeared. Im going to ignore it here, so that the devs can see when I last saved "Ignore Conflict".

I am bad at code review :(

dafuq?

question

um

I pushed that junk here, yell if anyone catches issues.

I sure wrote some Javascript today

Cool. The expectation is that this won't happen again going forward (we should automatically compute reachability from here on out). Let us know if you see it again in the same repository. If we get a few more reports maybe I'll make the error message mention this command.

That did it, thanks!

Try bin/repository mark-reachable rXYZ (and show me the output, maybe)?

Thanks, this is working now.

Let me know if that doesn't fix things. Expected behavior is:

Thanks for all the help digging into this, there is pretty much zero chance I would have guessed that on my own. I think D16149 should fix this properly, I was able to reproduce a similar error once I knew what I was after.

This is in all likelihood a mistake made forever ago but I'll wait for a potential patch.

O.o

Okay, I figured this out:

Thanks! Looks like we have things flipped for some reason. Let me see if if I can track that down. I think I should have a patch in an hour or so, or I'll let you know if I need anything else.

object 78daf8de9fe15dce0b4d0e1945a57c778e0536d7
type tag
tag v2.11.1
tagger Test User <test@test.com> 1413916998 -0400

tagging v2.11.1

We should be able to parse any repository in any state, so don't delete the tag!

If it requires us to delete the v2.11.1 tag then so be it, we understand that maybe we did something wild with history in the past but that tag doesn't really give us anything anymore so it can go.

Had to redact a bit:

(I suspect v2.11.1 is a tag-object and the tag-hash and object-hash are getting mixed up somehow, but hopefully the full command will shed some light on things.)

Hrrm, I'm very confused by that behavior.

The repo uses callsign P and refers to Platform.

Can you show me the output of these commands?

Actually, I'm slightly wrong about dropdowns-in-dropdowns being the issue, looks like some kind of rendering order problem instead.

Dropdowns need a bit of CSS tweaking but they feel OK to me.

e.g., pretty sure we can do slightly better than this without resolving any big philosophical questions:

We can/should also make hovercards richer -- I think that's mostly "free" in terms of product/design tension, especially for cards like mocks which have received very little attention.

oh, yeah derp. single line with more info would kick ass

Yeah, I'm leaning toward starting there too.

Oh, I wouldn't plan to make them meaningfully taller vertically -- I'm primarily imagining a very small adjustment ala "Reviewers" in Differential, e.g.:

Let's start with the two dropdowns and see how it goes.

In T11085#181202, @scode wrote:

@eadler Did you have enough insight/recollection as to whether all our reported cases were due to users editing in the web UI?

I go back and forth on if Tasks/Revisions/Commits should be richer. I do think maybe we can leave them as a list but have a button/dialog to pull up their full cards? My main concern UI wise is they'll take up a ton of space on larger tasks and really force the content down.

Yeah, I think that's totally reasonable. I want to fix up the UI for showing subtasks and revisions and stuff as part of T4788, so I'd expect to do this:

I'd probably turn this into two sections (I guess?) if we had a dropdown/disclosure element:

I was sort of hoping to make Pholio (for instance) a rich panel in the main column. So if I attached M1464, I would get a Pholio Panel with