In D25859#23607, @aklapper wrote:

I took the liberty to edit the commit message a bit to make reproduction easier (handy URIs to test, plus include the error message which allows easier search).

@valerio.bozzolan: Would you like to give this a (hopefully) final review? TIA!

Setting Request Changes per the small review comments so far (as I am looking at https://we.phorge.it/differential/query/all/ and it helps to see correct statuses)

Thanks for the patch! I can confirm that after applying the patch, on PHP 8.3 I can successful create the initiative http://phorge.localhost/I4 (and I get an unrelated PHP 8.1 deprecation warning about strlen(): Passing null to parameter #1 in src/applications/fund/xaction/FundInitiativeDescriptionTransaction.php:19)

This is impressive, thanks for writing this up! I don't have enough expertise to comment on the "Edit Phases", however all in all this looks super helpful for technical understanding!

Confirming that this works as expected. I took the liberty to expand the commit message to also include the current error message.

With D25878 applied, dialog for folks who can use Herald:

I've deployed it (https://www.phorge.it/)

Knowing rHP will be replaced by R10, I will submit a patch to close this task.

You're fast. lol I approve because life is too short.

null as fast as possible

I'd like people to clone from GH less for the bandwidth and more for the availability - GH is more likely to be up then us.
Technically I guess GH might have an issue with that, but they probably won't notice anyway.

(Maybe also moving in line 316, before phutil_utf8_strtolower() and the regexes)

Errm yes, now for real

Short-circuit null check, as rightfully proposed by Valerio

With this I have a regression in /w/. Do you have too?

No, because people do not read. The "read-only mirror" Wikimedia and GNOME code repos on GitHub regularly receive pull requests because people do not read anything.

In D25874#23455, @aklapper wrote:

I'm a bit worried that people will create Pull Requests on Github after downloading from Github...
Apart from download speed, are there other reasons why to recommend an external service?

I'm a bit worried that people will create Pull Requests on Github after downloading from Github...
Apart from download speed, are there other reasons why to recommend an external service?

Thanks Cigaryno. I think it's good to start a discussion on this and I appreciate you started this. I also have seen github.com suggested somewhere.

Thanks. I'm curious if there's anything up that should not call this with null. Also I'm curious to test with a couple of date filters and custom date fields.

LGTM

I found this, which suggests that this shouldn't be used for headers. https://secure.phabricator.com/D21862

LGTM!

Thanks! I'm sorry that the execute method has undocumented return.

Thanks! I share a comment on the fly, maybe more comments soon after a test :)

I think you are right for unnecessary catetorization and sending notifications.

Running arc liberate before installing worked well for me. Thank you again!

OK super! <3