Page MenuHomePhorge

merge phab/master -> phorge/master
Needs ReviewPublic

Authored by speck on May 20 2022, 03:05.

Details

Reviewers
None
Group Reviewers
Restricted Owners Package(Owns No Changed Paths)
Maniphest Tasks
T15094: Catch up the master branch to upstream
Summary

Refs T15094

This is a merge of the Phabricator master branch into Phorge's master branch.

Created this by

  1. Fetching/pulling latest changes from phorge
  2. Adding new remote from the phacility/arcanist repository on GitHub
  3. Fetched the master branch from this new remote
  4. Checked out origin/master (phorge)
  5. Ran git merge phab/master to merge the phabricator master branch changes into phorge's master
  6. There were conflicts in these files:
Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	both modified:   resources/celerity/map.php
	deleted by them: scripts/install/install_rhel-derivs.sh
	deleted by them: scripts/install/install_ubuntu.sh
	both modified:   src/docs/user/installation_guide.diviner
  • I re-added the install_*.sh scripts which I believe Phorge is intending to continue supporting while upstream has decided to remove it rather than try to fix/update for branding.
  • The installation_guide.diviner document I manually resolved conflicts which was mostly straightforward. I believe Phorge added some extra content (or upstream removed it).
  • For celerity/map.php I deleted the file and regenerated it by running:
$ ../arcanist/bin/arc liberate
$ ./bin/celerity map
Test Plan

tbd

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

Owners added a reviewer: Restricted Owners Package.May 20 2022, 03:05
speck requested review of this revision.May 20 2022, 03:05

I had to skip unit tests because phabricator/phorge unit tests require a local database to test against which I don't have setup. The lint failures are either pre-existing TODO's being flagged or the newest lint which catches product name literals. We should fix the literals but I don't want to fix that as part of the merge -- would rather do that in a separate change.

@speck I think we're sort of good to go here? maybe update?

@speck What is the status of this change?