Use status list UI to show reviewers in Differential

Summary:
Ref T1279. No logical changes, just updates the reviewer display style.

We currently keep track of only "requested changes".

Test Plan: See screenshot.

Reviewers: btrahan, chad

Reviewed By: chad

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7228
Track "accepted" and "commented" in per-reviewer status

Summary: Ref T1279. Updates status to 'accepted' or 'commented' when the user takes those actions.

Test Plan:
  - Commented on a revision, got a comment icon.
  - Accepted a revision, got an accept icon.
  - Commented again, icon stayed as "accept".
  - Faked the "old diff" states.

Reviewers: btrahan, chad

Reviewed By: chad

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7229
Allow projects to review revisions

Summary:
Ref T1279. No actual logical changes, but:

  - You can now add projects as reviewers from the revision view typeahead ("Add Reviewers" action).
  - You can now add projects as reviewers from the revision detail typeahead.
  - You can now add projects as reviewers from the CLI (`#yoloswag`).
  - Generated commit messages now list project reviewers (`Reviewers: #yoloswag`).

I'll separate projects from users in the "Reviewers" tables in the next revision.

Test Plan:
  - Added projects as reviewers using the web UI and CLI.
  - Used `arc amend --show --revision Dnnn` to generate commit messages.
  - Viewed revision with project reviewers in web UI.

Reviewers: btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7230
Accommodate project reviewers in Differential search

Summary:
Ref T1279. Two changes to the search/query for Differential:

  - "Reviewers" now accepts users and projects.
  - "Responsible Users" now includes revisions where a project you are a member of is a reviewer.

Test Plan:
  - Searched for project reviewers.
  - Verified that the dashboard now shows reviews which I'm only part of via project membership.

Reviewers: btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7231
Split users apart from projects/packages in reviewer and audit UIs

Summary: Ref T1279. Show separate sections for "Reviewers" and "Project Reviewers" (Differential) and for "Auditors" and "Package/Project Auditors" (Diffusion/Audit).

Test Plan:
  - Looked at a commit. Saw separation.
  - Looked at a revision. Saw separation.

Reviewers: chad, btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7233
Allow Herald rules to add reviewers

Summary:
Ref T1279. Although I think this is a bad idea in general (we once supported it, removed it, and seemed better off for it) users expect it to exist and want it to be available. Give them enough rope to shoot themselves in the foot.

I will probably write some lengthy treatise on how you shouldn't use this rule later.

Implementation is straightforward because Differential previously supported this rule.

This rule can also be used to add project reviewers.

Test Plan: Made some "add reviewers" rules, created revisions, saw reviewers trigger.

Reviewers: btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7235
Highlight reviews the viewer is responsible for in Differential

Summary: Ref T1279. No logical changes, but cosmetically highlight stuff you have authority for, like we do in Diffusion.

Test Plan: See screenshot.

Reviewers: chad, btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7237
Add an "Author's projects" Herald field to Differential

Summary:
Ref T1279. This allows installs to implement two different flavors of project review. They can either implement this rule:

  When:
    [ ... ] [ ... ]
  Take Action:
    [ Add blockign reviewers ] [ Security ]

...which means "every revision matching X needs to be signed off by someone else on the Security team, //even if the author is on that team//". The alternative is to implement this rule:

  When:
    [ Author's projects ] [ do not include ] [ Security ]
    [ ... ] [ ... ]
  Take Action:
    [ Add blocking reviewers ] [ Security ]

...which means that people on the Security team don't need a separate signoff from someone else on the team.

I think this weaker version maps to some of what, e.g., Google does (you need to be reviewed by someone with "readability" in a language, but if you have it that's good enough), but I could imagine cases like "Security" wanting to prevent self-review from satisfying the requirement.

@zeeg, not sure which of these use cases is relevant here, but either one should work after this.

Test Plan: Created rules with this field, verified it populated properly in the transcript.

Reviewers: btrahan

Reviewed By: btrahan

CC: zeeg, aran

Maniphest Tasks: T1279

Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D7238