So would the latter option mean doing $html_details = array($head, $more, implode(' ', $exceptions)); here? I kind of find this approach cleaner than appending a space to each item in the $exceptions array.

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.

Interestingly: https://secure.phabricator.com/T10574 argues for removal of the additional data from edges.

... whereas the $html_details is constructed as merely array($head, $more, $exceptions); ...

Without a reproduction, this is speculative.

Why would a branch name be an integer and not a string?

Yeah, I generally agree with "let the user set the width of the page"...

Can you add a couple of tests to https://we.phorge.it/source/arcanist/browse/master/src/utils/__tests__/cowsay/ ?

Did some digging, and it looks like Segoe is not something we can use:

Nuance has a "GitHub Repository: Import issues and pull requests from a GitHub repository" Source Type - it might already be doing something related?

hey, @ton - is this useful for you?

yeah, just default to https if it doesn't include a schema, and I think it should be fine in that regards.
There's probably already some method somewhere that looks at a uri and chooses HTTPFuture or HTTPSFuture based on the schema...

Check out https://we.phorge.it/book/contrib/article/javascript_coding_standards/ and the Javeline docs here: https://github.com/phacility/javelin/tree/master/src/docs/concepts
(I'll try to render the Javeline guide here later).

See D25420 for a conflicting change...

ooh, check out D25349 for basically this exact use-case...

if you check the checkbox, it will use the current setting timezone.

I'm thinking of adding similar handling for E_USER_NOTICE and E_USER_WARNING - to allow using them in extension code and in things like T15316 (Right now, we treat those as fatal errors too).

Would taking care of the depreciations bump the minimum PHP version required to run Phorge?

Not in itself, but we do plan to bump the minimum to 7.1 (in T15047).

Does not reproduce to me.
Which browser are you using? Are there any javascript errors?

Yeah, the dialog looks better then the extra popup...

But it adds another notification, and now the user will have to pick between 2 buttons that say "solve conflict".
It's also not the common path - in the common case, we expect users to actually approve the timezone offered by the dialog (which should be the one detected from the browser).

0. Welcome!

1. This diff is based of a commit that's not in master - some local changes that make it not-apply
2. the space should be on the inside of the pht(), not attached to it.
3. even better, find whatever is calling describeAutomaticCapability(), and if it accepts an array (some implementations return array, some return string), have the caller add a space between each element of the array - solving this once for all callers...

Adding another notification will only make this more annoying.

This might be a Good Starter Task, I think - you'll need to add a class for the config, and pull the config value in diffusion.

go for it.

a hack that might work: add a field in the document that's called "typeahead-text" or something, and put both title and callsign into it (and maybe number and short-name as well). Then use that field in the Datasource.
Since this is a full-text field, whatever the user types will fit this field...

rP99c9df96b4ffbf7 (2015) is the big "convert to Full Text Search" commit, but looks like it's not about Ferret (2017?).

I suspect that the code in People is the oldest one - this stuff blames to 2011! and does explicit sql stuff!

Yeah, that's probably good - that's the query for typeaheads and probably global search, but not for other cases.

Yeah, totally reasonable feature request.
Do you think you can implement?
This might involve the Ferret engine (like this thing, or maybe there's a simpler approach for the query (title LIKE %text% in the Query class?).

IDK - this was code was never explicitly about git am - I think it was about patch, which started in the stone age and predates things like "formal specification".