This makes me and probably other people mad lol
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
Sun, Mar 30
Mar 6 2025
Feb 26 2025
Feb 21 2025
Jan 25 2025
Jan 17 2025
Jan 14 2025
Jan 13 2025
Thanks revi. Dear @dereckson probably your nice installation is still on the legacy Phabricator? (or a Phorge before 2023 Week 17, accordingly to wiki search results)
Cannot repro on current stable (rPd3c0a7edc3fc and rARC05abd055019c as of today). Tested on local installation.
Jan 12 2025
Uh there's also phid_group_by_type($type) for extra readability and less code. Also maybe more modular for future things.
Jan 10 2025
Hi @jmeador would you appreciate an help to update this?
Dec 30 2024
Dec 29 2024
Dec 28 2024
Dec 26 2024
Dec 18 2024
Oct 31 2024
Sep 4 2024
May 18 2024
May 11 2024
Mar 1 2024
Feb 22 2024
See discussion and reasons in https://secure.phabricator.com/T11833
Feb 12 2024
In T15039#1358, @bekay wrote:
So maybe this is just a matter of parsing that commit part "Depends-on:" since everything else seem already implemented to me. Partially related quiz in T15738
Feb 9 2024
Feb 1 2024
can confirm, https://we.phorge.it/D25342?id=1111 does show an error for me in an incognito window.
Probably, something should "Attach" these files by default to that Diff, during the upload phase.
A workaround is to make all files as "Public". I fixed for example the diff D25079: Trigger: Add Sound "Coin" by setting the audio file F1271256 as public.
Jan 13 2024
Hmm I’ve used mercurial and arcanist/Phab for years at my company and don’t believe we’ve ever run into this. Any idea what’s causing the presence of the BOM? We’ll apply a change to handle the UTF-8 bom but I am curious what may have caused it to show up. Is your hgrc configured in some way for this or maybe an environment variable?
Sep 23 2023
I don't think we have a specific task for "general UI text improvements" - there's the UX project, but "improve UX" is an ongoing process, so I don't think a single parent task is a good match.
Sep 22 2023
By the way, is there a task or project about UI text improvements that this task could be made part of? I am looking e.g. at the button in this very comment box saying "Set Sail for Adventure", which, while amusing, is also prone to cause confusion.
How about something like "Endorse"? That might remove the connotations of speaking for the project position that something like "approve" or "accept" may imply.
Sep 20 2023
I'm trying to imagine a title that also involves the UX in general about accepting revisions, since it's also about the "Accept Revision" button, but my brain is not helping me right now in this
Sep 17 2023
Aug 31 2023
Aug 20 2023
Aug 18 2023
Aug 17 2023
Aug 15 2023
I confirm for e.g. https://we.phorge.it/D25079 or https://we.phorge.it/D25079?id=355 or https://we.phorge.it/D25079?id=360 that this only happens when not being logged in. Or on https://we.phorge.it/D25342?id=1111 stacking four errors on top of each other.
Aug 6 2023
Aug 3 2023
I think that D25359 is a nice example of a complete use case, where one Diff from one repo depends from another Diff from another repo.
Aug 2 2023
Jul 27 2023
I've explored a bit the codebase and this seems a desired non-feature.
Jul 26 2023
Uh thanks! Feel free to increase the "Hours invested" counter in the Task description ihih
Ok, I got bored.
Jul 25 2023
Jul 24 2023
I think we have an implementation:
Jul 22 2023
My plan is:
- If there's a commit information in the revision, use the author name and email from there. Not that this might not be the same as the revision's Author
- If there's no git commit - use author name from Author field, and make up email address (annonymos@example.com).
@avivey Yes I think this is what we need.
There is a caveat though:
@ton - this is what I have so far:
Jul 20 2023
Jul 19 2023
Jul 18 2023
Feel free to elevate this as a Task, since it's a nice bug report
Jul 12 2023
Unsure if tagging as Bug Reports
Jul 11 2023
Jul 7 2023
The workaround for me was to manually strip all of these lines:
yeah, typo. I'll fix it again...
ok, now I understand.
Thanks :) Silly question since I'm not native English: is there a repetition in "creating revision from revision from raw diff"?