Feb 27 2020
Feb 26 2020
- Also remove uncalled "checkException()" method.
The core idea in D5104 + D5105 is that $future->resolve() and id(new FutureIterator(array($future)))->next() (like, roughly) execute meaningfully different code paths.
Somewhere in experimental or wilds, I introduced ArcanistConduitEngine. This has some weird fake future stuff going on, so this is probably now ripe.
Feb 25 2020
Thanks, see D21029.
Feb 24 2020
Couple of notes on the state of affairs here:
As of early 2020, this change works:
JIRA did this (changed how accounts are identified) again recently (key is now accountId), see T13493.
One minor issue with this is that there's some duplication when the commit Fixes Txxx and the associated revision already has the edge (which is very common if the commit Fixes Txxx, because the revision almost always also Fixes Txxx):
To follow up on this:
I can't find any changelog in any version of Git which mentions the introduction of %B. The %B behavior was introduced in this commit in March, 2010:
See also PHI1605 (internal), which provides some evidence that:
Feb 23 2020
I landed everything so far to master. The new behavior in master should be:
- Also remove "realName" when unlinking an account.
I stumbled across what appears to be a very mild security issue in JIRA that impacts this flow. I've reported it to Atlassian's bug bounty program here (this link may or may not be visible to anyone else):
Feb 22 2020
This change sequence is almost ready to remove readers and writers to accountID, but there's still a unique <accountType, accountDomain, accountID> key on the table. Removing accountID writers completely will mean that the second user to link an account of a particular type (say, an Asana account) will run into a unique key error (since they'll write a second "Asana" account with the same empty accountID as the first "Asana" account).