| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
| |
format
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
basicprojectsdetails and changes the url to a more reader friendly format
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Remove icons from some buttons which already has text
Related to https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/18324
* remove plus icon from new milestone button on group milestone page
* remove plus icon from new project button on group projects page
* remove plus icon from milestone page
See merge request !5050
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Expire the branch cache after `git gc` runs
Due to a stale NFS cache, it's possible that a branch lookup fails while `git gc` is running and causes missing branches in merge requests.
I'm not totally convinced this is the right solution, but since we and our customers are experiencing this issue quite frequently, I'm taking a stab at it.
Possible workaround for #15392
See merge request !5160
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Due to a stale NFS cache, it's possible that a branch lookup fails
while `git gc` is running and causes missing branches in merge requests.
Possible workaround for #15392
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Be explicit on merge request discussion variables
## What does this MR do?
To avoid conditionals and to messing with request.format and accept headers to know in which format we're going to response I've decided to be explicit in when we need the discussion variables
## Why was this MR needed?
Solve a bug https://sentry.gitlap.com/gitlab/staginggitlabcom/issues/8492/
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #19702
## 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
- [ ] Added for this feature/bug
- [ ] 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)
See merge request !5204
|
| | |/ / |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ /
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Style of import project buttons were fixed in the new project page.
## What does this MR do?
I have fixed style of import project buttons in the new project page.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I don't think so.
## Why was this MR needed?
Because the buttons area hasn't looked well. Before this, it was scattered.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Fixes #19467
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## 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
- [ ] Added for this feature/bug
- [ ] 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)
See merge request !5183
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Fix expandable diffs
## What does this MR do?
Fix expandable diffs and the master build.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Nope.
## Why was this MR needed?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/4776#note_13003494
Doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry etc.
See merge request !5200
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Add rule about adding new header tab to the ui guide
To address cases like https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/3749#note_12994215
See merge request !5188
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
| |\ \ \ \ \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Update the health_check gem to the latest release
## What does this MR do?
Update the health_check gem to the latest release, which allows us to drop some of our code for overwriting the email check
## 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
- [ ] ~~Added for this feature/bug~~
- [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] 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)
See merge request !5186
|
| | |/ / / /
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
This allows us to drop our disable email config override
|
| |\ \ \ \ \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
api: expose {should,force}_remove_source_branch
## What does this MR do?
Exposes the `should_remove_source_branch` and `force_remove_source_branch` booleans via the API.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I don't think so.
## Why was this MR needed?
See the commit message.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
N/A
## Screenshots (if relevant)
N/A
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added
- [x] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [x] API support added
- Tests
- [x] Added for this feature/bug
- [ ] All builds are passing
- [x] 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)
- [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
See merge request !5184
|
| | |/ / / /
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Workflows which use a bot to merge should remove branches if requested.
Expose the flag so that bots can request know this.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \
| |_|/ / /
|/| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Display tooltip for "Copy to Clipboard" button
## What does this MR do?
Add a tooltip to the "Copy to Clipboard" button.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Nope.
## Why was this MR needed?
There was no tooltip.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
fixes #19640, #19682
## Screenshots
(wrong cursor is the fault of my screenshot program)
See merge request !5164
|
| | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Make "Get started with Builds" Help Page link work properly
`help_page_path('ci/quick_start', 'README')` causes a link to `https://gitlab.com/help/ci%2Fquick_start/README` which in turn breaks every relative link on the page. This remedies the problem.
That said, this is probably a horrible way of fixing this issue, *but* it does work. I can’t find much information on linking this deeply with Rails routes.
If anyone has suggestions as to a better way of handling this, I'll gladly take them. I tried a few different things, but none of them really worked.
Resolves #14872.
cc: @axil @rspeicher @elstamey
See merge request !3561
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
parameters.
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
This is probably a horrible way of fixing this issue, but it does work.
I can’t find much information on linking this deeply with Rails routes.
Resolves #14872.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Optimize cross ref system notes check
## What does this MR do?
This MR optimizes system note visibility checking by memoizing the visible reference count, reducing the overhead of calling `Note#cross_reference_not_visible_for?`.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Note that since a cross reference message contains, "Mentioned in XYZ", we EXPECT that there is at least one reference. That's why using the ref count > 0 works.
## Why was this MR needed?
The previous implementation relied on `Note#cross_reference_not_visible_for?`, which essentially tries to render all the Markdown references in a system note
and only displays the note if the user can see the referring project. But this duplicated the work that Banzai::NotesRenderer was doing already. This shaves about 0.8 s
from the load time from https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/operations/issues/42.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#19273
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## 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 [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)
See merge request !5070
|
| | |/ / / / /
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
have been fully redacted and contain cross-project references.
The previous implementation relied on Note#cross_reference_not_visible_for?,
which essentially tries to render all the Markdown references in a system note
and only displays the note if the user can see the referring project. But this
duplicated the work that Banzai::NotesRenderer was doing already. Instead, for
each note we render, we memoize the number of visible user references and
use it later if it is available.
Improves #19273
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Added day name to contributions calendar
## What does this MR do?
Adds the day name text into the contributions calendar tooltip.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #19367
## Screenshots (if relevant)
See merge request !5065
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Closes #19367
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ |
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Remove pinTo from Flash
## What does this MR do?
- replace `pinTo` of `Flash` by `parent` parameter in constructor
- move positioning of layout containers from CoffeeScript to layout files
- adjust styling of inline flash messages
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
- display of flash messages in general
## Why was this MR needed?
- allow finding and positioning flash message containers within layout files
- allow adding different CSS classes to flash containers within layout files (necessary for fixing #18908)
- allow multiple flash messages to be displayed at different places at the same time
- make inline flash messages look nicer
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
closes #18908, closes part of #18897
## Screenshots
### Inline flash message (before)
### Inline flash message (after)
### Other flash messages (after)
---
---
---
---
---
---
### This is possible now
See merge request !4854
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
[ci skip]
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | |_|_|/ / / / /
| |/| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Clean up coffeescript files imported from GitLab CI
## What does this MR do?
This MR cleans up CoffeeScript files imported from GitLab CI along with a strategy #19159. Some files should have been removed in !1987.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
While I think the `Build` module should be named as `Build`, not `CiBuild` in the JavaScript namespace, please check if it should.
## Why was this MR needed?
Removing unused coffeescript files reduces time to build JS and so time to transfer even in production. The fewer files, the better, too.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #19159
## Screenshots (if relevant)
n/a
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [skipped] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added
- [skipped] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [skipped] API support added
- Tests
- [skipped] Added for this feature/bug
- [x] 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)
See merge request !4925
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | |_|_|_|_|_|/ /
| |/| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Fix problems with events under notes importing GitLab projects
Fixes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/19588
See merge request !5154
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
fix/import-event-error
|
