Implement support to preview unsupported patches

[eseliger]

Closes #11193

Tasks from issue:

• Move the IsRepoSupported checks so that patches from unsupported repositories are accepted, but not published (checks need to be moved to the Service and possibly the ExecChangesetJobs function)
• In publishChangeset mutation we should return an error
• In publishCampaignChangesets mutation we should skip them
• We should add a Publishable: boolean property to Patch in the GraphQL API
• We need to remove the "is supported" check in src-cli

For the last task: Do we really need to? We currently have a flag to allow creating patches for unsupported codehosts, which helps here. Removing it would mean we default to that behavior and I think that more customers would want to omit them than would want to store them for future use by default.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #11793 into master will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 92.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #11793   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   47.68%   47.69%           
=======================================
  Files        1402     1402           
  Lines       79772    79790   +18     
  Branches     6732     6734    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits        38041    38057   +16     
- Misses      38155    38156    +1     
- Partials     3576     3577    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
#go	51.85% <90.90%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
#storybook	10.11% <ø> (ø)
#typescript	36.62% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
#unit	47.29% <92.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cmd/frontend/graphqlbackend/campaigns.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...rc/enterprise/campaigns/detail/CampaignDetails.tsx	56.83% <ø> (ø)
web/src/enterprise/campaigns/detail/backend.ts	10.71% <ø> (ø)
...prise/campaigns/detail/patches/PatchSetPatches.tsx	80.00% <ø> (ø)
...erprise/internal/campaigns/resolvers/patch_sets.go	80.72% <60.00%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
enterprise/internal/campaigns/service.go	73.09% <100.00%> (-0.18%)	⬇️
enterprise/internal/campaigns/store.go	85.62% <100.00%> (+0.09%)	⬆️
.../enterprise/campaigns/detail/patches/PatchNode.tsx	72.41% <100.00%> (+2.04%)	⬆️
...odeintel/bundles/persistence/cache/reader_cache.go	93.75% <0.00%> (+2.08%)	⬆️

[mrnugget]

For the last task: Do we really need to? We currently have a flag to allow creating patches for unsupported codehosts, which helps here. Removing it would mean we default to that behavior and I think that more customers would want to omit them than would want to store them for future use by default.

The ticket (https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph/issues/11193) says:

Right now, if you try to create a patch on a repo that is not supported (eg because it's on GitLab or another non-supported code host), it is silently discarded:

https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph@615077bc91a6208bb60288fedba19a0adc5d6d1d/-/blob/enterprise/internal/campaigns/service.go#L82:17

This is surprising and prevents someone from trying out campaigns if their code host is not yet supported.

So, the question is: instead of silently dropping this, what options do we have?

[eseliger]

So, the question is: instead of silently dropping this, what options do we have?

This is fixed IMO:
The src-cli lists unsupported repos, and suggests to use the flag to still include them:

And once they hit the backend API, we will never discard them anymore, but keep them and display them as in the screenshot above, being publishable: false`. I think the ticket mentioned us dropping it silently on the backend, which we now don't do anymore.

[mrnugget]

This is fixed IMO:

And that's also displayed when there were repositories found and not only in -v?

I think the ticket mentioned us dropping it silently on the backend

Both. From an end user's perspective you can't tell where it's dropped.

[eseliger]

Ah you're right, it's not on non verbose mode.
what do you think about the below?

[mrnugget]

what do you think about the below?

I think making it visible in non-verbose mode is good. I'm not sure yet about listing the repository names (because the list can grow quite long), but I think this is better than just a sentence.

The text itself contains a lot of redundancy: "(Including 1 on unsupported code hosts.)" should not be necessary if we print "The following repositories were filted out because [...]". But we can take a look at that in the src-cli PR.

[mrnugget]

Code looks good, but I think this can be simplified a lot in the backend. See my other comments.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #11793 into master will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 94.28%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #11793   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   47.68%   47.69%           
=======================================
  Files        1402     1402           
  Lines       79772    79787   +15     
  Branches     6732     6776   +44     
=======================================
+ Hits        38041    38056   +15     
  Misses      38155    38155           
  Partials     3576     3576           

Flag	Coverage Δ
#go	51.85% <93.75%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
#storybook	10.11% <ø> (ø)
#typescript	36.62% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
#unit	47.29% <94.28%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cmd/frontend/graphqlbackend/campaigns.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...rc/enterprise/campaigns/detail/CampaignDetails.tsx	56.83% <ø> (ø)
web/src/enterprise/campaigns/detail/backend.ts	10.71% <ø> (ø)
...prise/campaigns/detail/patches/PatchSetPatches.tsx	80.00% <ø> (ø)
...erprise/internal/campaigns/resolvers/patch_sets.go	80.72% <60.00%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
enterprise/internal/campaigns/service.go	73.59% <100.00%> (+0.31%)	⬆️
.../enterprise/campaigns/detail/patches/PatchNode.tsx	72.41% <100.00%> (+2.04%)	⬆️
...odeintel/bundles/persistence/cache/reader_cache.go	93.75% <0.00%> (+2.08%)	⬆️

[eseliger]

Related PR on src CLI: sourcegraph/src-cli#236