@epriestley I can see how that last sentence could be perceived as such. I probably should have put a smiley there since it wasn't intended as harsh as you (seem to) perceive it.

@epriestley yes, the tested owner packages were both weak dominion. Sorry for not mentioning that earlier. You've explained the issue perfectly as far as I can tell. The changes you have planned make a lot more sense than the current behavior and should fix the issues we were seeing. Thank you!

Why did you think that a sarcastic, condescending comment was the best way to convince me to reserve judgement?

@epriestley I'm hoping you'll see you shouldn't pass judgement that fast.

@siepkes, what are you hoping to get out of making that comment? How do you believe it benefits you?

@lvital, I can only reproduce this if use "Weak Dominion". Is that the case in your example, too?

@epriestley Onelogin does way more then just SAML. They also do OAuth for example. The screenshot also says to regenerate your Oauth keys. I assume your going to remove all OAuth stuff from Phabricator now?

This transaction uses shouldHideForFeed(), which isn't currently supported by Modular Transactions. It got swapped over in D17844 or some related change and we didn't catch that the logic wasn't firing anymore since this is a bit of an obscure case.

More on SAML:

My guess is they updated early in the week, saw the broken image, and updated and still saw the broken image. Not that they updated and tested the reproduction steps again.

Thanks - I didn't know about Herald and your answer was spot on!

Thanks, this reproduces here for me.

(This is still on my radar.)

I believe this was fixed by 7b290b94a726f7c9eb3efd9e065499fde1b0ad00. Are you 100% sure that the image was updated after that change?

Use tsprintf() ("terminal string print formatted") instead of phutil_console_format():

From T12771:

Global Rule for Differential Diffs
When:
[ Repository ] [ does not exist ]
Take these actions:
[ Block diff with message ] [ "Repository unrecognized. See https://helpful-docs.com/repository-help for details." ]

I think all the bad bad stuff is resolved and I'll have more design tweaks outside of this.

Oh! If it's just a comment on an item, admins can remove comment on the drop down on the item and it should also be removed from feed.

You're likely right. I'll move down both corridors and see what I find. The system is fine.

I get what you're asking, but professionally it feels like you're trying to put a band-aid on a broken bone. It needs to be addressed. As admin you should be able to nuke most things from CLI or DB.

Bad hires are not a reason to ask the upstream to prioritize work. Even if feed had "delete" it doesn't solve the emails that already left the system.

Task deletion usage:
Colleague submits something for archival, but accidentally leaves in a bunch of dramatic content which does not reflect positively on hisself.

需求故事收集看板

In T1026#224714, @epriestley wrote:

I currently expect to revert this change and decline to implement the feature because it makes using Differential on a phone more difficult for left-handed users

But most of all, it shouldn't depend on ... any bloated framework. That's why clipboard.js exists.

Yeah I'm surprised this seems to have reasonable adoption now.

Sorry I guess it is 5 lines:

I super hate that feature but it looks like it's literally three lines of JS. How does that repository have 18K stars? This is like left-pad v2.

Ah f*ck that's more node

family thing? Wouldn't you rather write a clipboard js implementation like https://github.com/zenorocha/clipboard.js

Yeah, I think we get even more design leeway here if we do T9713 and the actual commit page becomes less of "big blog of poorly aligned text" and more "list of revisions, tasks, diffs, builds" + "option to view raw".

So punt to improving commit pages?

(I've got some kind of family thing going on myself so I may not be around too much longer tonight.)

I think the link to the revision is probably the most generally useful piece of information, but we could replace this:

You can just click the commit title to get to builds/diffs/etc. GitHub has no direct link to builds/tasks/issues; GitLab has a direct link to builds only.

Imma get kids to be, then some diffs 4 u

In T12780#225628, @epriestley wrote:

The "Browse" buttons also don't actually do anything right now, but probably don't need an icon.

Maybe just a single status icon, that's a pass/fail, that's a menu with links to Tasks, Diffs, Builds?

The "Browse" buttons also don't actually do anything right now, but probably don't need an icon.

we have icons

What if we just removed the icons completely?

Honestly, half assed thought is currently:

I'm just going to steal them.

I don't think any icon is ever really going to say "Revision", "Audit", "Lint", "Build", "Task", "Commit", etc., no matter how many fancy illustrators we hire.

But yeah, all our most important icons are terrible. I'm a bad designer.

I plan to fix table and tweak the design of list more, I just needed to see it with some real data.

The problem is "gear" doesn't say "revisions" to me, without the check it's just a menu looking thing.

Without changing the design much:

We could maybe flip them. IDK...

Yeah, I think it's really hard to layer the icons and get top notch design.

Also: one of these commits has an important build failure, can you find it in less than 15 minutes as a user with poor color vision?

I think that got things closer but we aren't quite there yet. I'll poke at this a bit more tomorrow.

Possibly fallout from T11784 / D17911, although those shouldn't really interact here unless there are other bugs.

T11997/T12032 look related, but not the same behavior.