| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |\ |
|
| | |\
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Fix the diff in the merge request view when converting a symlink to a regular file
## What does this MR do?
It fixes a bug described in #21610
## Why was this MR needed?
There was a regression introduced in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/cd7c2cb6ddd4d9c9f9bdae00c887c0022c121c17
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added
- Tests
- [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` (if it does - 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?
Fixes #21610
See merge request !6828
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
regular file.
In this specific case using file_path as a cache key is not enough,
because there are two entries with the same path.
Closes #21610.
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ / |
|
| | |\ \
| | |/ |
|
| | |\ \ |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
When reading conflicts:
1. Add a `type` field. `text` works as before, and has `sections`;
`text-editor` is a file with ambiguous conflict markers that can only
be resolved in an editor.
2. Add a `content_path` field pointing to a JSON representation of the
file's content for a single file.
3. Hitting `content_path` returns a similar datastructure to the `file`,
but without the `content_path` and `sections` fields, and with a
`content` field containing the full contents of the file (with
conflict markers).
When writing conflicts:
1. Instead of `sections` being at the top level, they are now in a
`files` array. This matches the read format better.
2. The `files` array contains file hashes, each of which must contain:
a. `new_path`
b. `old_path`
c. EITHER `sections` (which works as before) or `content` (with the
full content of the resolved file).
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | |_|/
| |/| | |
|
| | | |/
| |/| |
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ / |
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
* Don't set request format to atom if '.atom' suffix was not provided
* Don't try '.atom' detection logic on request that uses extended_sha1
Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Using `extend self` prevents GitLab Performance Monitoring from being
able to track class methods.
Fixes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23347
|
| | |\ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
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
|
| | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Reassign secret token when regenerating one
## What does this MR do?
This is an attempt to fix intermittent errors in out test suite.
```text
Failures:
1) Gitlab::Shell memoized secret_token creates and links the secret token file
Failure/Error: expect(File.read(secret_file).chomp).to eq(secret_token)
expected: "690f959e206ab91acc54e1c605c7ff90"
got: "cccb4e8df9360600271e61114d4e6e68"
(compared using ==)
# ./spec/lib/gitlab/backend/shell_spec.rb:47:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
```
It appears that `spec/lib/gitlab/backend/shell_spec.rb` tries to change the file that stores secret token, but `Gitlab::Shell` memoizes `@secret_token` on class level, so when it was already created by other tests (`spec/requests/api/internal_spec.rb` in this case), memoized token is not reassigned even if it was generated again with `ensure_secret_token!`.
See merge request !6844
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \ \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
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
|
| | | |/ / |
|
| | |\ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
CE to EE merge check rake task
## What does this MR do?
This merge request adds a Rake task that checks whether the current branch can be merged cleanly to EE/master.
If not, it checks if a `<ce_branch>-ee` branch exists in EE, tries to merge it to EE/master and then tries to merge `ce_branch` to EE/master.
If the result of the check is that the current branch cannot be merged cleanly to EE/master, the job will fail, display troubleshooting steps, and a warning will be shown in the merge request.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Probably the steps I used to do the various checks, and also the steps I suggest to create an EE-specific branch.
## Why was this MR needed?
The goal is to catch as early as possible the possible conflicts a CE MR will cause when CE/master will be merged to EE/master. This way, the developer is warned that he/she should open a MR against EE before or as soon as the CE is merged. In the end, this should lower the work of the CE->EE merger.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Part of gitlab-org/gitlab-ee#715, hopefully.
See merge request !6746
|
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Also add a safeguard for non-CI env.
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | | |/ /
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | |\ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
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
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \ \
| | |_|/ /
| |/| | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Convert unicode emojis to images.
## Why was this MR needed?
For better cross platform interoperability with emojis.
Closes #22591
See merge request !6829
|
| | | | | | |
|
| | | |\ \ \ |
|
| | | |\ \ \ \ |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
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>
|
| | |\ \ \ \
| | |_|/ /
| |/| | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Allow browsing branches that end with '.atom'
## What does this MR do?
1. Simplify the regex capture in the routing for the CommitsController
to not exclude the '.atom' suffix. That's a perfectly valid git
branch name, so we shouldn't blow up if we get it.
2. Because Rails now can't automatically detect the request format, add
some code to do so in `ExtractPath` when there is no path. This means
that, given branches 'foo' and 'foo.atom', the Atom feed for the
former is unroutable. To fix this: don't do that! Give the branches
different names!
## Why was this MR needed?
Creating a branch or tag name ending in '.atom' would cause some 500s on that repo.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #21955. Related to !5994.
See merge request !6750
|
| | | |/ /
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
We need to do two things to support this:
1. Simplify the regex capture in the routing for the CommitsController
to not exclude the '.atom' suffix. That's a perfectly valid git
branch name, so we shouldn't blow up if we get it.
2. Because Rails now can't automatically detect the request format, add
some code to do so in `ExtractPath` when there is no path. This means
that, given branches 'foo' and 'foo.atom', the Atom feed for the
former is unroutable. To fix this: don't do that! Give the branches
different names!
|
| | |\ \ \
| | |_|/
| |/| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Move reply by email docs to a new location
## What does this MR do?
Move reply by email docs to a new location.
Part of https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/3349
## Moving docs to a new location?
See the guidelines: http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/doc_styleguide.html#changing-document-location
- [ ] Make sure the old link is not removed and has its contents replaced with a link to the new location.
- [ ] Make sure internal links pointing to the document in question are not broken.
- [ ] Search and replace any links referring to old docs in GitLab Rails app, specifically under the `app/views/` directory.
- [ ] If working on CE, submit an MR to EE with the changes as well.
See merge request !6517
|
