Good question.

Yeah, that might help (like specifically in the case of the Clone dialog) even though it wouldn't help with dialogs containing writable inputs. (E.g. on the repository page, click Flag For Later instead and press Shift+Tab and Escape.) A better fix would lie at https://we.phorge.it/source/phorge/browse/master/webroot/rsrc/externals/javelin/lib/Workflow.js$413 where either the getSpecialKey would need improvement itself to return true for these non-modifying keys, or it would need to be amended with a custom check in that regard. However, I don't know where that function comes from.

Probably something here should be expanded to check if the form contains at least a visible input without read-only

:p

I was responding to the previous comment which...

Our company uses the Phorge, and we use Keycloak as IAM. Keycloak is a very popular OAuth2/SAML provider now.

GitHub/Facebook is already supported as an Login/Registration providers.

In T15047#1308, @speck wrote:

Did that Phactory: Hosting Projects Here

I can reproduce this, on an hosted Subversion repository.

Yes will be great to see a SAML or Oauth support for external authorities like:

• Keycloak
• Entra ID
• Github
• Facebook
• WeChat / WeCom

Premising that we may want to rollback 328aee033fbd, probably this line is broken:

Ouch. Probably partially my fault. Feel free to escalate this as Task under Bug Reports - close this as obsolete then

I can reproduce this on master with basically any string search.

https://we.phorge.it just works fine. :L

Interesting. This cannot be reproduced here in this website https://we.phorge.it? isn't it? I think no

:p

(Please edit file Visibility to make them Public :D It's another bug ihih - thanks! <3)

The exception throw out when I search text in search bar:

Please also include your exact search. I think you are searching by https://foo and that is unfortunately not possible without "doing this"

@avivey to do now:

Your email address(es) set by you for your user account in the Phorge Project

That is private data. Nobody can access it.

I have a problem with this statement:

Would you like to go to court to defend that statement? :)

OK OK. So what else? Maybe this (mention from https://secure.phabricator.com/p/epriestley/):

I could not sign it if it required brushing three times a day. Removed purely due to egoistic laziness reasons.

No brushing teeth three times a day? However it looks good to me 👍

Well, I would rewrite quite a bit, so I'll post a draft here before editing directly:

Totally agree. Thanks for any edit in the stub.

In T15121#3880, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

I don't think that the author should ever allow to re-license its work. [...] Normal volunteers do not accept that.

Unrelated note, but interestingly the contributor agreement chooser (https://contributoragreements.org/) is broken. I've already sent an email to their support.

In T15673#15587, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

TRUST ME - YOU DON'T WANT TO LISTEN MY ENGLISH :D :D

Btw now the video is here :D :D AGAIN SORRY PHORGE FOR MY MISTAKES <3 <3

https://video.fosdem.org/2024/h2215/fosdem-2024-3610-unpack-phabricator-welcome-phorge-forking-the-opinionated-open-source-project-manager.av1.webm

In T15673#15587, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

TRUST ME - YOU DON'T WANT TO LISTEN MY ENGLISH :D :D

Btw now the video is here :D :D AGAIN SORRY PHORGE FOR MY MISTAKES <3 <3

TRUST ME - YOU DON'T WANT TO LISTEN MY ENGLISH :D :D

Nice! Is there a recording of the talk?

Nice, you touched on most of the advantages of Phorge. It really does have some strong competitive advantages.

Hahaha I’m just now seeing this. Thank you for putting together the presentation and giving the talk. I enjoy seeing your excitement!

Thanks for all the tips <3 <3

I was able to recover the layout in PNG at least. Imagine this 3''x2''. Here:

I'M REALLY SORRY FOR WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO SEE - I'M NOT A DESIGNER

One concern that I have is that there isn't really a one-size fits all deployment. A single tiny VM image with the database and web server pre-installed would probably be ideal for evaluating and even for a tiny team's use. Once usage increases beyond a very basic level then users will fairly quickly outgrow a tiny VM and need at least a larger memory, more storage, possibly a separate database node, etc. Migrating from the tiny setup to a more robust setup might not be a fun process and I don't know how much we should encourage people to start out with a setup that won't scale very well for them.

I think there's an app-store style thing for hosted VMs in the big cloud providers

Maybe we can wontfix this, and try other more modern approaches like flatpak. Example:

## Contents

- is Phorge good for my Organization?
- differences between Phorge and GitLab, GitHub, Launchpad, Mantis, ...
- what's new in Phorge (that is not in Phabricator)
- practical workflows and pitfalls
- how to join the Phorge community
- how to propose code patches

As the patch was merged I assume that this issue is resolved. If not, then please reopen - thanks!

I set this to unbreak now just to give extra visibility on the homepage :^)

Noticed a few dangling phacility references in URLs in documentation, which could lead users to grabbing upstream Phabricator versions by mistake:

phorge/src/docs/user/field/xhprof.diviner:  $ git clone https://github.com/phacility/xhprof.git
phorge/src/docs/user/userguide/arcanist.diviner:  some_install_path/ $ git clone https://github.com/phacility/arcanist.git
phorge/src/docs/user/userguide/arcanist_quick_start.diviner:  somewhere/ $ git clone https://github.com/phacility/arcanist.git

corresponding to:
https://we.phorge.it/book/phorge/article/xhprof/#installing-xhprof
https://we.phorge.it/book/phorge/article/arcanist/#installing-arcanist
https://we.phorge.it/book/phorge/article/arcanist_quick_start/#installing-arcanist

I have some containers I put together for development which could provide a place to start
https://github.com/neandrake/phab-dev

In T15566#14934, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

I've just found again this

https://github.com/cooperspencer/phorge/

In T15673#14931, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

OH MY GOD FOR SOME REASONS THEY RE-OPENED OUR PROPOSAL \o/ IT'S HAPPENING!

https://pretalx.fosdem.org/fosdem-2024/talk/review/EXZNAUXQKMJ7HRYYRD7MKFXTTV8JFQDJ

I do not remember who was developing Docker stuff for this. I've just found again this

OH MY GOD FOR SOME REASONS THEY RE-OPENED OUR PROPOSAL \o/ IT'S HAPPENING!

They have no space at FOSDEM 2024 for Phorge, nor in Collaboration and..., nor in Lightning talks :(

The only trouble with maintaining a separate arcanist package is keeping the version in sync with phorge. Phabricator never followed anything like semantic versioning and there was never really any stable api version to depend on. Perhaps we could think about versioning and release cycles that follow a more predictable major version release cycle with API compatibility guarantees. It is certainly more convenient (for the upstream) to avoid all of that but it offloads quite a bit of burden on anyone trying to use the software.

Phacility was very much against this kind of things, but I actually favor supporting some packages, at least for Arcanist on the big package-managers - if nothing else, it would allow us to make sure the package with the right name is doing the right thing.

Feel free to review, in case:

Unfortunately they have not accepted our proposal in the track Collaboration and Content Management. I've proposed that again as Lightning talk as suggested to me by FOSDEM ex-speakers.

I'm quite sure that somebody of you will join FOSDEM. In case, please join this talk as presenter :)

Unless something broke, this task is now complete.