If the GitHub project repository has wiki, we should not create the default wiki. Otherwise the GitHub importer will fail because the wiki repository already exist. This bug was introduced here https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/892dea67717c0efbd6a28f763 9f34535ec0a8747
Ensure the 'fixed layout' preference is honored whenever possible ## What does this MR do? Currently, when viewing any Merge Request the user's fixed-layout preference is overridden if they have set "Side-by-Side" view as their preference when viewing diffs. This makes sense if they are currently viewing a diff, but this is confusing when their layout preference is overridden while they are on another tab (i.e. "Discussion" or "Builds"). This MR moves all responsibility for overriding the fixed layout from the Ruby page layout helper into frontend JavaScript where it is only applied when needed. ## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check? Check that nothing broke for users which have their layout preference set to "Fluid" as well as those which have it set to "Fixed". I've already done this but double checking is always good idea :smile:. ## Screenshots (if relevant)  ## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria? - [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added - Tests - [ ] All builds are passing - [x] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides) - [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if you do - rebase it please) - [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits) ## What are the relevant issue numbers? Closes #22343 ## Other Notes As @lbennett noted in #22343, this is something of a band-aid. It fixed most of the issue, but we still need to have a discussion about whether or not is acceptable to override user layout preferences for "Side-by-Side" views in general. At least this MR limits the scope of this behavior to a single tab within an MR or merge conflict page. See merge request !6422
Fix bug when trying to cache closed issues from external issue trackers fixes #22446 See merge request !6619
Upgrade acts-as-taggable-on from 3.5.0 to 4.0.0. ## What does this MR do? Upgrades the acts-as-taggable-on gem from 3.5.0 to 4.0.0. Changelog: https://github.com/mbleigh/acts-as-taggable-on/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#400--2016-08-08 ## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check? That this works without the migrations, I don't believe the upgrade from 3.5.0 to 4.0.0 requires any migrations since [UPGRADING.md hasn't been updated since 3.5.0 was released](https://github.com/mbleigh/acts-as-taggable-on/blob/master/UPGRADING.md). It's kind of unclear, unfortunately. ## What are the relevant issue numbers? Fixes #22082. Working toward Rails 5: #14286. cc: @dzaporozhets See merge request !6660
Simplify Mentionable concern instance methods ## What does this MR do? Simplify arguments received by the instance methods on the concern so in the closer future will be easy to understand and change ## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check? ## Why was this MR needed? ## Screenshots (if relevant) ## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria? - [ ] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added - [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md) - [ ] API support added - Tests - [ ] Added for this feature/bug - [ ] All builds are passing - [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html) - [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides) - [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if you do - rebase it please) - [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits) ## What are the relevant issue numbers? See merge request !6596
Improve `Members::DestroyService` Part of #21979. See merge request !6267
Append issue template to existing description ## What does this MR do? When selecting an issue template after entering a description, append the template and leave the original content intact. ## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check? Not that I'm aware of. ## Why was this MR needed? The issue template shouldn't override the issue content without warning. ## Screenshots  ## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria? - [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added - [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md) - [ ] API support added - Tests - [x] Added for this feature/bug - [x] All builds are passing - [x] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html) - [x] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides) - [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` - [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits) ## What are the relevant issue numbers? https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/21733 See merge request !6149
Todo issue due date ## What does this MR do? Adds the text 'Due today' or 'Due [DATE]' next to issues in todos. This does not add anyway to filter by due date - little steps. ## What are the relevant issue numbers? #18218 See merge request !6351