In D25015#616, @speck wrote:

In this case I think the error text is agnostic of the instance of the dialog. From looking at AphrontDialogView I didn't see any obvious way to include additional fields/text that could be pulled out here on the front end. Looking elsewhere in this file (line ~297) it looks like some other generic text is used

if (!this._paused) {
  JX.$E('Resuming a workflow which is not paused!');
}

However that's the only case where JX.$E is used outside of an is-development check. I'm not sure where these Javascript translations would go or when the translation file is generated.

To be fair, I'm almost certainly not going to install yet another client just for this community chat. (I know I'm not alone in this, projecting forward into the project's future.) Matrix + IRC with bridges to the other protocols seems the way to go. (I'm usually on IRC...albeit, not much this month because my plate's full.)

This looks good to me.

I added @dcog @codemouse92 and @mydeveloperday to the trusted contributors group. Glad to have everyone involved!

In this case I think the error text is agnostic of the instance of the dialog. From looking at AphrontDialogView I didn't see any obvious way to include additional fields/text that could be pulled out here on the front end. Looking elsewhere in this file (line ~297) it looks like some other generic text is used

if (!this._paused) {
  JX.$E('Resuming a workflow which is not paused!');
}

I'm not familiar with the search engine or legalpad frameworks but things look like they line up

@roguelazer - added you to Trusted Contributors so you should be able to land now

FWIW, I can't land this myself since I don't have push access to any repos; I would appreciate it if someone would either land it (or give me such permissions, if that's the preference).

Wow, this is something I developed for wikimedia but not nearly as extensive! I'll try to give some code review when I have a few minutes to look this over.

+1 this has bitten me before.

Not sure if this is where to mention, I would definitely like to help develop/maintain/review Phorge (I have signed the doc), I currently maintain a 600+ user Phabricator instance housing 50+ git repos,

• Be quiet Linter!

• Move Links and Names to Variables

The ubuntu/rhel scripts have been removed in the upstream (https://secure.phabricator.com/D21678). We can probably avoid making changes to those files as they should go away once we merge in changes.

In T15010#1062, @avivey wrote:

Any user should be able to sign the doc at L1 Phorge Vision Statement - did you try it and got an error?

In T15010#1060, @codemouse92 wrote:

I agree with the doc, and would like to sign too.

Glad to see Phabricator continuing as Phorge. Not going to lie, I had a panic attack this morning when I found out that Phacility was winding down.

The arcanist source in general seems to be split between fwrite(STDERR, $message."\n") and fprintf(STDERR, "%s\n", $message); I decided to go with the latter.

I think the latter format would be preferred as the formatting is more common elsewhere in the code, as opposed to concatenation.

And for google you don't need to provide an email, you can also just get a gmail address.

@speck we can use the existing GitHub organization for oauth. (an owner can setup the app in settings)

I think this would be reasonable but I think it requires setting up an account on GitHub or Google on behalf of Phorge (rather than using a member's personal account). If someone wants to set up a GitHub/Google account for phorge we can set it up here. It'll require an email address though and I'm not sure how to handle an organization email like that.

I can help out with upstream merges. I've been doing it on a regular basis for Wikimedia for a long time now. It's rarely been a problem but I'm been careful to make sure that Wikimedia's fork doesn't drift too far away from upstream.

Just as a note, All of the mentioned chat platforms can be bridged together.

I'm not a big fan of IRC because in order to look through history or pickup where a user last joined it requires individual users to maintain their own tooling/practices. The temp-community chat was the first Zulip chat that I've used, and installed the mobile app for. I thought Zulip worked pretty well and wouldn't mind continuing with that. I've used Matrix (Element?) briefly but didn't feel too strongly about it. It's probably worth mentioning that our current Zulip instance has ~135 members and we've still had ~1-2 new people join per week lately. Though there's not much actual discussion going on there.

Handling of merging upstream changes will probably lead to some challenging merges done by people who did not author the original changes in Phorge. I don't know what the best way is to work around this. Maybe if we regularly (daily?) pull in changes from upstream, merge into our own master branch which everyone lands onto that should mostly catch merge issues?

We don't seem to have any opposition to having a community/support IRC channel, so perhaps I'll start working with Libera staff on registration.

I just want everything "important" to be happening here, where the search and cross-references works and async communication is easy.

I prefer IRC but don't have any issues with having Matrix bridged there, but I would prefer to not have separate unbridged channels to reduce fragmentation of the already-small community.

In T15035#1019, @TitanNano wrote:

Are there any thoughts about a matrix channel? It would also be possible to bridge it to IRC.

In T15035#1019, @TitanNano wrote:

Are there any thoughts about a matrix channel? It would also be possible to bridge it to IRC.

Are there any thoughts about a matrix channel? It would also be possible to bridge it to IRC.

The translated text can be a property of the dialogue itself, if we're worried about having extra objects laying around - the confirmation feels like it's a feature of the dialogue anyway.

There's no way to invoke pht from JS (because it's really complicated in the general case). The general practice is to provide the translated value from PHP when building the relevant objects. There should be an example in the UIExamples app - there's a page with buttons built in JS.

There already are a bunch of worthwhile changes in Phabricator we should pick up; @Matthew - want to load them to check out the procedure? I can do that otherwise.

In D25015#539, @Ekubischta wrote:

I 100% agree with this. Is there no way to invoke internationalization via JS only? If not, that's perfectly great, but wondering about an answer offhand.

In T15001#1011, @MacFan4000 wrote:

In T15001#980, @MacFan4000 wrote:

Just a note that Trusted Contributors can’t self grow beyond admins adding people currently as to add members you need to be able to edit the project. Currently only admins can edit the project.

IMO the edit policy should be set to Project Members. This way it’ll be able to self grow. :)

In T15001#980, @MacFan4000 wrote:

Just a note that Trusted Contributors can’t self grow beyond admins adding people currently as to add members you need to be able to edit the project. Currently only admins can edit the project.

In T15035#1008, @eax wrote:

FWIW I don't object to support or community channels off-instance but I do think we need:

• all decisions should be made on-instance
• we should have a culture of ensuring that any "interesting" discussions get recorded on-instance.

FWIW I don't object to support or community channels off-instance but I do think we need:

• all decisions should be made on-instance
• we should have a culture of ensuring that any "interesting" discussions get recorded on-instance.

I would certainly be happy to work with Libera staff to get the community registered.

I would like to be a part of the core team, and I've signed the document.

On a related note, tonight I discovered this UIExamples application (changing links from my Vagrant install):

In D25015#532, @speck wrote:

It’s generally more clear to have the buttons read “Discard changes” vs. “Ok” or “Yes”

I agree

Would it be easy to change the prompt to be more descriptive with actions?

For me, I think it might be on the hard side... and maybe add some bloat? Unless there is a styled generic confirm box created that maybe uses a callback instead of blocks execution...

Would it be easy to change the prompt to be more descriptive with actions? It’s generally more clear to have the buttons read “Discard changes” vs. “Ok” or “Yes”

Thanks for accepting this. I can’t land it though, somebody with the proper permissions will need to do it.

It is a step forward, but considering how the URL could be factorized would be a plus, IMO.

In T15030#978, @20after4 wrote:

regarding a monorepo, I'm not sure if there is an advantage to that, I'm fine with individual repos. I currently maintain most of Wikimedia's extensions in a single monorepo but I'd consider splitting them out into individual repos if any one them were candidates for upstreaming.

Just a note that Trusted Contributors can’t self grow beyond admins adding people currently as to add members you need to be able to edit the project. Currently only admins can edit the project.

regarding a monorepo, I'm not sure if there is an advantage to that, I'm fine with individual repos. I currently maintain most of Wikimedia's extensions in a single monorepo but I'd consider splitting them out into individual repos if any one them were candidates for upstreaming.

I'd like to host https://github.com/wikimedia/phabricator-antivandalism here, perhaps under a new name.

The Caddyfile boils down to

In T15030#972, @avivey wrote:

A space-zombie game that can report high-scores to IRC, Slack and Phorge.

Here's the terms I've been thinking of for accepting a project to Phactory:

1. Directly related to Phorge in a significant way:

Good: Module for integration with some other system; New Phorge app that does something reasonable; scripts for administration work.
Bad: A space-zombie game that can report high-scores to IRC, Slack and Phorge.

Checking the Wikipedia entry for GDPR at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation it mentions that this regulation or other similar ones have been enacted in:

Of course since Phorge itself is a public project with, potentially, UK/EU contributors the signup/login page should really display such a warning.

Yea I think it will be easiest to host this on the same server that's running we.phorge.it. If we're able to build it as an extension application for phabricator it can be setup in the same installation and then we can route the web server to host it properly.

I think that the best choice is to keep everything in one place, so create the presentation site on the same infrastructure of we.phorge.it

sorry for late reply. I can start working on it now. Where will be it hosted? Do you have some preference? We can use also my company infrastructure and change DNS record for a 3rd level to point to the IP.