Yup. Laaaand

As temporary Phorge workaround, we may want that keywords rendered as progress so we can manually add backtics (?)

Thaaaanks. I wonder why $has_password has a dedicated variable, and instead $has_username has not 🤔

Flagging all comments as done (but feel free to share other things)

Thanks again @speck. This is probably useful to answer your performance question:

😐

Thanks. It seems that line 17 impose edit capability. Also, appendForm() does not accept a null.

I cannot imagine any situation where the incoming viewer from handleRequest(AphrontRequest $request) could be different from the implicit viewer from AphrontController#getViewer() ($this->getRequest()->getViewer()).

In T15889#18557, @aklapper wrote:

In T15889#18536, @valerio.bozzolan wrote:

Thanks. What happens in older Apache2 versions?

Nothing. :) This issue only popped up in our error logs after an Apache update.

Ah. Maybe PhabricatorSearchHost should extend PhabricatorSearchService? Boh

I don't get this 🤔

OK. If you are partially mentioning nonsenses in we.phorge.it itself, you are indeed right.

(Wow. I've never clicked on that button in my life, also when working)

By the way I cannot reproduce in Apache 2.4.61 🤔

Thanks. What happens in older Apache2 versions?

Thanks! Looking at PhabricatorSubscriptionsMuteController that works with PhabricatorTransactions::TYPE_EDGE, this seems good to me.

Setting as "new validations probably need to be managed". Thanks again

Thanks :) Interesting weird transaction.

Just that oneline

In D25736#20139, @aklapper wrote:

(Hmm should I replace $ex->getMessage() with $caught->getMessage() or not?)

So this is "just" something affecting "logs", right? It is not an error ever visible to user interface.

(Trying to make this task a bit more about the root problem, and less about the proposed solution)

I mean. See this archived Project (archived Milestone), that is linked from our changelogs:

Premising that I like the implementation but I think it's not the desired solution.

Additional consideration under control: an external class may have extended AphrontTypeaheadTemplateView and defining a renderToken() there, and making this snippet operative (I'm not saying that it's a good practice, I'm saying that it would work). But this extreme corner case is not the case.

Seems super nice. Minor comment. If we do this, the stack trace is NOT shared:

Strip block

Marking as "probably something different should be done"

In short, requireFieldImplementation seems correct in their legacy version, and something is not ideal in the consumer, that has a try catch. That try-catch should be edited.

Note that every unmanaged exception is logged. So if you don't see a log, something is already managing this.

Unrelated but @aklapper I'm curious about the situation in WMF. If you can maybe report something like this:

• was this improving the situation? rPf4d9d6920bcd: The feed "created this task" should be the first one seems yes, accordingly to your comments
• was PhabricatorTransactions::TYPE_CREATE needing a nice action name? yes
• Am I confused about newActionStrengthSortVector? Yes. I don't know why it works, but it works. But this deserves further discussion.

OK I'm stupid. I just need to visit the Milestone and create a Workboard.

Seems that nothing internally accessed that method, and probably nothing externally. But we should probably keep that method since it's public. Thanks.

I was still able to generate QR codes, and I verified with alternative application "Barcode Scanner" that the desired URL is read.

Premising that the root problem is that it's difficult to understand if a project is archived just looking at other parts.

Thanks. Feature make sense and implementation seems good (but I have untested).

git rebase master (again)

Sorry for waiting.

git rebase master

(↑ isn't this lovely? lol)

This is a low quality image that could be used by "fair use" as meme. Source: