congrats, awesome feature!

Ok I think it should allow anyone to use the form now.

I think that the owner of a task can always see it but I might be mistaken.

Already fixed upstream: https://we.phorge.it/rP67cf80b377bd33b5ff259fff26e09a3c1424f422

So we don't currently have a fix for T299244 but we also aren't comfortable reverting the branch at this point due to several complex changes that landed this week. The people who wrote the code aren't around and neither are any release engineers (I have to leave shortly)

In T298999#7615948, @EAkinloose wrote:

This works fine now: tested on
mw.org Sandbox

Testing on mw.org might not suffice, we've been rolled back to testwikis since yesterday.

It appears that this is no longer a blocker.

I enabled the repository field on form 9.

Form 6 is more restricted, it's for policy-admins not project-admins

1. Merging the revert in wmf.16 to unblock the train for this week.
2. Leaving this as a blocker for wmf.17 because the revert hasn't merged in master.

@Krinkle: Would you say that reverting the patch is a reasonable short-term solution to get the train unblocked?

My input, informed by ~8 years of deploying and the most recent problems I experienced with patch application:

Patch to revert: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/q/Ic6c0e31c8247f7d89824d20f28fb0aa56d6ed749

This appears like it will cause significant problems if we roll it out to all wikis as scheduled. My options are to either revert the patch or hold the train. I'm leaning towards reverting but I'd welcome feedback from anyone who knows more than I do about the situation.

This patch is apparently causing quite a bit of noise in logs and will likely have a bigger impact with the rollout of 1.38.0-wmf.16 to all wikis today. I may revert the above patch (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/346176) if there isn't a better solution to be found. see T298659: BadMethodCallException: Sessions are disabled for load entry point

@matmarex thanks!

Should this task continue blocking the train and if so, how serious of a blocker? Should we continue with group0 rollout and deal with this as Thursday approaches or does this need to block group 0/1?

In T298369#7591308, @Marostegui wrote:

I am not sure if this is entirely related, but I have found quite a few runs of the following queries:
{P18265}
They are slow and they've been run a lots of times in the last 3 hours. I have no idea what they do and if they are normal or not.

There shouldn't be more than one of these: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/transactions/editengine/transactions.editengine.config/

That comes from the form for edit forms:

I can omit it from the workboard cards, however, now that it's been pointed out, the just doesn't seem right for other places where it represents status.

Proposal: How about the unckecked-box icon for open tasks:

Agreed that it's not the best icon choice or placement. The markup used in that UI makes it difficult to achieve a consistent result without making more drastic modifications to the code. I'll look into what can be done to improve it without too much surgery.

So I'm looking into integrating something like this into phabricator proper. I also want to figure out how to support gitlab in the process.
Are there still people using the browser extension and if so what has your experience been like? Are there features you'd like to see added or limitations that we can address other than the 50 items per request issue?

After playing with kibana for a few minutes, I can't figure out any search criteria that actually does match scap logs currently.

https://caddyserver.com/v2 might be an interesting way to implement this.

I don't think it is useful to work on something specific to wikimedia. This is a general enough thing that it can be shared and we should instead contribute to other people's efforts for development environments rather than developing and maintaining our own.

https://github.com/willson556/phorge-devcontainer

In T296893#7544085, @Legoktm wrote:

It would be nice if we could automatically synchronize Tool maintainer lists and Git repository owners, whether that's automated via LDAP or manually by Striker.

Links to existing solutions in the Wikimedia environment would be appreciated.

@Urbanecm: This all makes perfect sense and I don't want to make people's work more difficult. To the point of onboarding and offboarding stewards, this sounds like a process that's ripe for automation.

I believe it should be possible to host private repos on gitlab, not 100% on that. Note that it hasn't been 100% decided that we are dropping ssh. It would save significant maintenance effort if we didn't have to deal with the 5 ways it breaks each time we upgrade hardware or migrate Phabricator to a different server.

Probably not going to have time to work on this.

Here is a custom form for WMUA-Tech: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/edit/form/107/

The tag icon is entirely semantic but it can be used in search and I find that helpful for filtering out projects that are not relevant to a particular context.

Is there any reason not to use the tag icon, even if not really intended for global use?

The easiest thing to do would be all or nothing. Cherry-picking some of the fields to copy might be more involved.

It seems like the consensus is to disable it but if there is a use-case for it then I'm all for supporting it.

@AntiCompositeNumber - how about this:

In T292094#7480801, @gmodena wrote:

Do you think this makes sense? Would this plan fit the CI Pipeline rollout timeline discussed in this phab?

If it helps I'd be happy to guinea-pig some of the solutions discussed in this thread.

In T288956#7370524, @Zabe wrote:

Btw tasks set to "in progress" are not visible on the main page ate 'new tasks', like tasks set to 'stalled'.