| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Make internal api work with full repo path and name
## What does this MR do?
Make internal api work with full repo path and name
## Why was this MR needed?
So we can pass full repository path on filesystem from gitlab-shell instead of extracted one. We need this for nested groups support where project is can be nested under several groups.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/2772
See merge request !7148
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
| |/
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
control flow.
When adding a deploy key that already exists in the project the existing key would not be returned, resulting in an attempt to create a new one, which in turn caused a 500 error due to an ActiveRecord exception.
When adding a deploy key that exists within another project the key would be joined to the project, but would also attempt to create a new one, which resulted in a 400 error due to the key already existing.
Fixes #22741
Fixes #21754
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Grapify tags API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the tags API.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
The delete endpoint only has a description but no success entity because we don't have one. We only return the branch name as JSON. Should I do something else?
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !6860
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Grapify the labels API
Add the Grape-DSL to the labels API. Since the input validation messages are checked, two tests are modified slightly.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !7070
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Grapify builds API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the builds API.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
The artifacts API directly downloads a file rather then returning a JSON entity.
See merge request !6877
|
| | |/ / |
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
- Pass `developers_and_merge` and `developers_can_push` in `params`
instead of using keyword arguments.
- Refactor a slightly complex boolean check to a simple `nil?` check.
|
| | | | |
|
| |/ /
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
1. Previously, we were not removing existing access levels before
creating new ones. This is not a problem for EE, but _is_ for CE,
since we restrict the number of access levels in CE to 1.
2. The correct approach is:
CE -> delete all access levels before updating a protected branch
EE -> delete developer access levels if "developers_can_{merge,push}" is switched off
3. The dispatch is performed by checking if a "length: 1" validation is
present on the access levels or not.
4. Another source of problems was that we didn't put multiple queries in
a transaction. If the `destroy_all` passes, but the `update` fails,
we should have a rollback.
5. Modifying the API to provide users direct access to CRUD access
levels will make things a lot simpler.
6. Create `create/update` services separately for this API, which
perform the necessary data translation, before calling the regular
`create/update` services. The translation code was getting too large
for the API endpoint itself, so this move makes sense.
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Grapify the commit status API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the commit status API.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !6879
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
API: Fix Sytem hooks delete behavior
## What does this MR do?
This corrects the delete API for system hooks. Returning 200 is not the right way indicating a hooks is not found.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Discussed in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/6861/diffs#609af00c90e3d5241064d1404e3e018a3235634a_64_62
See merge request !6883
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| |/ / /
|/| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Grapify boards API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the boards API.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !6876
|
| | |/ / |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Grapify todos API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the todos API.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !6875
|
| | |/ / |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Grapify system hooks API
## What does this MR do?
Add the Grape-DSL to the system-hook API.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22928
See merge request !6861
|
| | |/ / |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ /
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Sort API mounts
## What does this MR do?
Sort the API mounts.
## Why was this MR needed?
The API mounts are unsorted.
See merge request !6831
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| |_|/
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Refactoring Issues Board
## What does this MR do?
This MR aims to minimize conflicts between the CE issues board feature with EE multiple boards feature.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
To avoid a lot of conflicts with EE multiple boards feature.
## 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)~~
- [x] API support added
- Tests
- [X] Added for this feature/bug
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] 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?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/929
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/1084
See merge request !6727
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
GrapeDSL for variables
See merge request !6838
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| |/ / /
|/| | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
API: Version information
## What does this MR do?
Adds a new endpoint to retrieve the version information.
## Why was this MR needed?
Clients can now use this information to enable/disable certain API features depending on the version.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #22608, https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23148
See merge request !6822
|
| | | |/
| |/| |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ /
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
'master'
Resolve "Move `/licenses` api endpoint to `/templates/licenses`"
## What does this MR do?
It moves the `/licenses`, `/gitignores` and `/gitlab_ci_ymls` API endpoints under the `/templates` namespace
## Why was this MR needed?
In EE we now have somewhat ambiguous API endpoints. `/license` refers to the EE license while `/licenses` (plural) refers to license templates. @DouweM mentioned that we're adding .gitignore templates in #14106 so it may make sense to add a /templates namespace. Then, move the /license templates endpoint to be underneath, along with .gitignore endpoints.
Closes #17541
See merge request !5717
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
The /licenses, /gitignores and /gitlab_ci_ymls endpoints are now also
available under a new /templates namespace. Old endpoints will be
deprecated when GitLab 9.0.0 is released.
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ /
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
API: New /users/:id/events endpoint
## What does this MR do?
If add a new `/users/:id/events` endpoint to retrieve a user's contribution events. The events returned are filtered so that only the events for projects that the current user can see are returned (similarly to what we do at the controller level).
## Why was this MR needed?
Because it's a nice feature to calculate leaderboards, for instance for #17815.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #20866.
See merge request !6771
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | |/
|/|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
API: Share projects only with groups current_user can access
Aims to address the issues here: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23004
* Projects can be shared with non-existent groups
* Projects can be shared with groups that the current user does not have access to read
Concerns:
The new implementation of the API endpoint allows projects to be shared with a larger range of groups than can be done via the web UI.
The form for sharing a project with a group uses the following API endpoint to index the available groups: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/494269fc92f61098ee6bd635a0426129ce2c5456/lib/api/groups.rb#L17. The groups indexed in the web form will only be those groups that the user is currently a member of.
The new implementation allows projects to be shared with any group that the authenticated user has access to view. This widens the range of groups to those that are public and internal.
See merge request !2005
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
