Summary: Ref T3092. Same deal as D6771, but for branches rather than projects.
Test Plan: {F54855}
Reviewers: btrahan, chad
Reviewed By: chad
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6775
Summary:
Ref T3092.
Releeph's objects basically go like this:
- At the top level, we have Projects (like "www" or "libphutil")
- Each project has Branches (like "LATEST" or "v1.1.3")
- Each branch has Requests (like pull requests, e.g. "please merge commit X into branch Y (in project Z)")
Currently, there's no real "project detail" or "branch detail" page. Instead, we have a search results page for their contained objects. That is, the "project detail" page shows a list of branches in the project, using ApplicationSearch.
This means that operations like "edit" and "deactivate" are one level up, on the respective list pages.
Instead, move details onto the detail pages. This gives us more room for actions and information, and simplifies the list views.
Basically, these are "detail pages" where the object content is a search interface. We do something simliar to this in Phame right now, although it's messier there (no ApplicationSearch yet).
@chad, you might have some ideas here. Roughly, the design question is "How should we present an object's detail view when its content is really a search interface (Phame Blog for Posts, Releeph Project for Branches)?"
I think the simple approach I've taken here (see screenshot) gives us reasonable results, but overall it's something we haven't done much or done too much thinking about, I think.
Test Plan: {F54774}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: chad, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6771
Summary: Ref T3092. Fixes T3724. Use modern/flexible UI for these interfaces. Removes the ability to retarget an existing branch (you can just close it and open a new one if you made a mistake).
Test Plan: {F54437} {F54438}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3092, T3724
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6765
Summary:
Releeph branch lists in project views have a bunch of custom UI right now; give them more standard UI and ApplicationSearch.
This drops a small piece of functionality: we now show only a total open request count instead of a detailed enumeration of each request status. I assume this is reasonable (that is, the important piece is "is there something to do on this branch?"), but we can muck with it if the more detailed status is important.
Test Plan: {F54344}
Reviewers: btrahan
Reviewed By: btrahan
CC: LegNeato, aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3656
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6764
Summary: Fixes T3548. Concrete Releeph controllers currently extend either from ReleephController or PhabricatorController directly. Instead, make them all extend ReleephController. Introduce ReleephProjectController for controllers which depend on project context. Project context code which lived in ReleephController moves to ReleephProjectController.
Test Plan: Viewed list, project, releases, requests.
Reviewers: btrahan, edward
Reviewed By: edward
CC: aran
Maniphest Tasks: T3548
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6472
Summary:
This diff covers a bit of ground.
- PHUIDocumentExample has been added
- PHUIDocument has been extended with new features
- PhabricatorMenuView is now PHUIListView
- PhabricatorMenuItemView is now PHUIItemListView
Overall - I think I've gotten all the edges covered here. There is some derpi-ness that we can talk about, comments in the code. Responsive design is missing from the new features on PHUIDocument, will follow up later.
Test Plan: Tested mobile and desktop menus, old phriction layout, new document views, new lists, and object lists.
Reviewers: epriestley, btrahan
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D6130
Summary: Went and pht'd most everything I could find, except exceptions. Fixes T3091
Test Plan: Bopped around the application, didn't seem to break anything but didn't test all flows. Should be safe.
Reviewers: epriestley, edward
Reviewed By: epriestley
CC: aran, Korvin
Maniphest Tasks: T3091
Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D5825
