This page uses the Structured Discussions extension to give structured discussions. See the main page for answers to many FAQs. Please do random testing at Talk:Sandbox.
I recently signed up for a Phabricator account but accidentally provided an invalid address for verification. Is it possible my account could be deleted so I can restart?
For some unfathomable reason, Phabricator is sending me notifications at my old e-mail. There is no e-mail stored in my Profile or Settings (that I can find), and the global e-mail is correct. Why is Phabricator using an outdated e-mail?
Tbh, I feel that's...not so nice. What if editing global herald rules is an useful thing for me, but #acl*phabricator seems huge for that thing, and #repository-admins is about something else, but kinda an overkill too. What should one request to be able to do this? Or should people not request solely this ability for a reason I don't see?
A special group would make sense IMO. Thanks for explaining why it works that way, but I still think it's mixing two things, somehow.
Also, what should I tag if I want a global herald rule to be edited? #repository-admins seems like a total nonsense at the first glance, but the only tag I know that has at least some relationship to the issue. I did so at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T230831, and it was removed by Andre "because it has nothing to do with repos". Agreed, but I don't see a good way then.
Herald is exceptionally slow, heavy code and already over-used. I'm not sure creating new avenues encouraging further use of this tool (which slows down the whole of Phabricator for every other user) is a great idea.
Agreed. On the other hand, I don't think keeping repository admins the "only" point of contact is a good idea. I agree herald is quite used (probably over-used), and I'm aware of the slowness issue. The first thing makes it even more likely to have "I need this herald rule to be edited" type of requests. How should one handle that should be...documentated, probably.
The avenue doesn't need to encouraging further uses of this tool. It can even discouradge from it, explaining why herald is not a good idea probably and should be used only when no other good thing exists (or seems to exist). I can ask one of the repo admins I know, but wouldn't the preferred way to request such stuff be create a ticket? My only concern is how to tag it, that's all. Tagging with repository-admins seems reasonable given how permissions are configured, but is strange at the first, second and probably also third glance. I hope you understand it.
PS: How would you recommend to handle team and code type of connections? For instance, the Growth team manages the GrowthExtension, but tags to tag both with growth-team and growthexperiments exist, to have way to query for tasks "connected with growthexperiments extension" as well as "tasks worked on, or watched by, the growth team". It's natural growth team needs a good way to tag things tagged with growthexperiments also with growth-team. However, I'm not aware of any option besides global herald rule. You may know better, through.
Is there a way to query for tasks which moved on the workboard over the last X hours (1 day, one week, whatever)? I am currently triaging tasks that are in the Growth Team inbox (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/1114/) and I move them to other states (Triaged but Future, Revisit, Blocked, etc). It would be nice to have a query that could show the tasks which I've moved, so that others on my team can see which tasks have been triaged.
The underlying data to support this query is in there, but there's no such report in Phabricator, as far as I know, and I never implemented exactly such a search in Phlogiston.
@KHarlan (WMF) you can filter boards by "Updated After" and "Updated Before" and use plain language to do so (e.g. "12 hours ago", such as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/board/1114/?filter=XSTgspFSG96b). "Updated" won't specify if a task was moved so much as if a task was affected in any way at all (e.g. moved, tagged, edited, commented, etc), so it's not useful when you need to be that granular, but it's a start.:)
I already looked at my spammed files - but there isn't any. Maybe it has been filtered by the providers spam filter. So what can I do? Is there any admin wo can verify my email address? I'm sysop in deWP - there it is verified.
Failed to load class or interface "PhabricatorPartialLoginUserLogType".
The class or interface "PhabricatorPartialLoginUserLogType" is not defined in the library map of any loaded library.
If you are not a developer, this almost always means that a library is out of date. For example, you may have upgraded "phabricator/" without upgrading "libphutil/", or vice versa. It might also mean that you need to restart Apache or PHP-FPM. Make sure all libraries are up to date and all services have been restarted.
If you are a developer and this symbol was recently added or moved, your library map may need to be rebuilt. You can rebuild the map by running "arc liberate".
For more information, see: https://phurl.io/newclasses
After an annoyance caused by the fact that it is necessary to indicate an e-mail address for Phabricator, I mistakenly typed a false e-mail address and confirmed the creation of the account. Can you delete my account ? My user name is AirSThib.
Good question...thanks!:) While I don't see IP addresses in that task, the task includes other personal information (for example users who were members of non-public venues where such download links were shared), so personally I'm very reluctant to "unmask" these users by making that task public.
Do you have some specific information that you're looking for?
I follow the Phabricator task T228574. That task was rather promptly declined and closed since it in part involves the ongoing task T227416 which is already being dealt with. The latter is related to a security issue and therefore restricted, and I currently haven't got the necessary user permissions needed to view it. Question: even though I can't view the task itself or the data it involves, I wonder if there's any possibility for me to get an automatic notification when the task is resolved (at which point the first, non-security- but otherwise related task T228574 would also be resolved)?
I'm fairly big on security myself (VPN, 2FA, PGP etc.) so I can appreciate that. However in this (and I guess all similar) cases the only information I can see about the task is the task ID and that it's restricted, and a text string saying that the task owner can view and edit the data. That's it. A search for the task ID won't reveal anything more either (and of course it shouldn't).
As far as I can tell leaking status information in these particular cases wouldn't pose a problem, since regardless of status I can't see any information regarding when the task was first issued, nor any data about what problem the task is supposed to deal with, or the task owner's user ID. As you said that information is supposed to be non-public so that's of course fine.
However, as a bureaucrat on Wikispecies I would like to be able to tell our users in the autoconfirmed user group when they no longer need to (temporarily..?) use CAPTCHA in order to add external links to reference templates and citations, per the public but closed T228574 task mentioned above. (Odd as it may seem, apparently the bug doesn't pertain to any other user group, including confirmed users.)
However, regarding your situation I see a problem that there is no good way to "apply" for access to a specific non-public task... Maybe you should just get subscribed to the non-public task? I've asked on that task.
This comment should not be deemed to be a decision if you should have access to the task, Ï just wanted to comment on the specific issue you mentioned as a reason for getting access.
@AKlapper (WMF), Martin Urbanec: Hello again and thank you both for the updates! Andre: I haven't poked around in all the pages about this, but from a quick glance I can't see how I would be able to subscribe to the non-public task. The information I get is really limited – please see the included screenshot. Is there any other way/page from where I would be able to subscribe to non-public tasks while still keeping the non-public restrictions intact?
As written, there is no good way to "apply" for access to a specific non-public task. It is intentional that you cannot subscribe to a non-public task because the task is non-public.:)
The access policy most of restricted tasks have is "members of (some acl project, such as Security) and subscribed accounts". Since you can't subscribe to a non-public task, list of subscribers is used as an ACL to let in people who should have access to this (and only this) restricted task. The sentence "Maybe you should just get subscribed to the non-public task?" just meant "Maybe we should just let you in [by subscribing you to the task]".
Thanks for explaining. The "Maybe you should just get subscribed..." sentence from AKlapper (WMF) is a bit ambiguous, suggesting that I could perhaps subscribe in some odd way, after all.
Anyway, I consider this matter resolved (-ish...:) and will settle with that. I'm one of the Wikimania 2019 volunteers so right now there's definitely more urgent tasks to handle than trying to resolve already resolved issues...:)
> As written, there is no good way to "apply" for access to a specific non-public task. It is intentional that you cannot subscribe to a non-public task because the task is non-public.:)
It might not be clear for most people that being subscribed actually allows you to access the task. Tried to clarify in my above comment.
