When you think of it, it's also a waste of bandwidth to even transfer FontAwesome when I have a working copy in my system's fonts folder.

My concern is that I can't tell Firefox which fonts from which sites with which checksums it shall trust, so I block all of them and rely on my locally installed fonts.

We only serve a local trusted copy, is that your main concern?

Hopefully I can use this to repair the broken icons while still blocking foreign font files. At first I thought I had to create a custom mapping from CSS class names to Unicode characters, or even icon sprites in cases where I can't find a nice Unicode character for the meaning.

My only new thoughts on free tier are concerns over it being a "leaky faucet" money wise, ie, that we're paying out hard cash for daemons, etc, for instances that aren't being used. I'm not as worried about support since we're holding the stack. Which is why we offer "test instances" which we GC now.

I think this is reasonable to pursue, but I'd like to put the capability at the ApplicationSearch level rather than making it specific to one field in Feed -- basically, provide not(user) and not-viewer() or typeahead functions (or similar functions with better names).

Cool. We can build this later for "free tier trial" if we do that, since we would definitely make different decisions based on the data then (0% conversion = don't do it, 100% conversion = ship it immediately, somewhere in the middle = run the numbers or whatever).

Yeah I think these stats are super interesting. Probably prefer nux stuff.

Oh, I can skip it if you aren't too concerned about it, it just came up and I didn't want to forget about it. I think it's like 10 minutes of work, but I'm perfectly happy to not do that work too. I don't think having this data would change any decisions I'd make, at least, even if the data showed extreme results:

Potentially moot with private clusters? Do you think this is worth the effort today?

I think this should be fixed in HEAD of master now. It should promote to stable pretty shortly, probably. Let us know if you're still seeing issues after updating, and thanks for the report!

This is all a bit of bike shedding anyways, these are concept explorations about function, and not final form.

That's perfectly fine. Thanks for the thorough answer! I see your point and indeed, I think this strikes a better balance.
Keep on doing this great work and building a product that helps everyone have fewer bugs! ;-)

That is my intention, yes, to be able to easily favorite the current page.

its not about star being used for favorites so much as being used as an 'action' menu.
I'd expect a "gear" (a la gmail) or something similar. Pressing the star would make me think I'm flagging the current page in some way,

It's one of the most commonly used symbols for favorites these days. Do you have a better suggestion? I think "bookmark" is less recognizable, and this is no longer strictly a create menu.

I'd theoretically be open to doing that kind of thing, but I worry it would waste a lot of our time in arguing over whether or not something is really a good bug report or not. We already see a lot of this with our security bounty program and the definition of a valid report there is very narrow.

Thanks!
Evan, do I get an extra free month for using phacility?
;-)

I think we already add this flag in most cases (via ArcanistGitAPI->getDiffBaseOptions()), but the specific check in arc land doesn't go through that code (since it doesn't really care about the diff, just if the are any changes at all).

Thanks Chad!

Shortname is already used for the shortname.git portion of the URI. Would it be out of the question to allow a separate path to be configured, perhaps also including nested directories?

Thanks, @ksmith @milimetric @jaufrecht @mbinder! +1 to all of you

Looking at the history of git, it looks like --no-ext-diff was introduced circa 1.5.3 (2007).

nice!

I agree with Kevin that the point limit seems a lot less useful than the task limit. They're both useful for different reasons, but having been a scrum master and on agile teams for the past 10 years, I find the task limit more fundamental to the processes I've seen.

A better way to think about this is, we only want Phabricator specific things in our documentation. Once an item falls outside of Phabricator, our expectation is you will manage that based on your preference / expertise. Unfortunately with a team of two people, maintaining a greater level of detail in the the documentation is significant and insurmountable.

Can you point to me exactly where we state you should build a cron? https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/configuring_backups/

In T9640#189032, @michaeljs1990 wrote:

@reet- If you are using ppa:ondrej/php they tend to be of higher quality then the official php packages maintained on ubuntus ppa in most cases. You have to trust someone however and in this case it's ondrej instead of canonical.

In T11433#188778, @chad wrote:

It's not our intention to provide detailed examples for every scenario or operating system, given the tens of thousands of possible examples needed.

@reet- If you are using ppa:ondrej/php they tend to be of higher quality then the official php packages maintained on ubuntus ppa in most cases. You have to trust someone however and in this case it's ondrej instead of canonical.