| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Fix markdown rendering for label references
Fixes #14424, #19753, #19760
See merge request !5224
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This reverts commit 9ca633eb4c62231e4ddff5466c723cf8e2bdb25d, reversing
changes made to fb229bbf7970ba908962b837b270adf56f14098f.
|
| | |
|
|/ |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Allow developers to merge into a protected branch without having push access
## What does this MR do?
Adds a "Developers can merge" checkbox to protected branches much like the "Developers can push" checkbox. When the checkbox is enabled, a developer can merge MRs into that protected branch from the Web UI and from the command-line (any push that is entirely composed of merge commits is allowed).
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
- This MR refactors the `GitAccess` module, moving parts of it to `UserAccess` and the new `ChangeAccessCheck`.
- This MR refactors `GitAccessSpec`, which generates a "matrix" of tests.
- The main logic "developers can merge" should be straightforward enough.
- The commits are fairly atomic, and the commit messages are descriptive regarding the motivations behind every change.
## Why was this MR needed?
A significant portion of this feature was implemented in !4220 (thanks, @mvestergaard!) ; I'm wrapping it up.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#18193
Closes #967
## Screenshots



## TODO
- [ ] #18193 !4892 Add "developers can merge" as an option for protected branches
- [x] Review existing code
- [x] Fix build
- [x] Implementation / refactoring
- [x] Clean up `GitAccess`
- [x] Clean up `protected_branches.js.coffee`
- [x] Figure out authorization issue
- If we try to merge code into a protected branch for a user who doesn't have access to that branch, an auth check will fail
- We need to get around this, somehow
- [x] Try detecting merge commits and allowing those
- [x] A push with regular commits _and_ merge commits should fail
- [x] Figure out a solution
- [x] Extensive tests for `MergeCommitCheck`
- [x] Add tests
- [x] Untested parts of original MR
- [x] Improve the checks in `/allowed`
- @dzaporozhets's proposal:
- commits in push == commits in merge request
- branch to push == target branch of merge request
- merge request has required amount of approves (ee only)
- merge commit in push == merge commit we created when merged via UI
- save merge commit sha in database and compare with `newrev`
- my proposal
- /allowed finds all open merge requests with the appropriate target branch
- For each MR, compare the commit SHAs in the MR to the commit SHAs in the change set
- If we have a match, compare the diff of the matching MR to the diff of the change set
- If we still have a match, the merge is legit
- [x] Wait for replies on my proposal
- [x] Pick a strategy
- [x] Implementation
- [x] Save `in_progress_merge_commit_sha`
- [x] Check `in_progress_merge_commit_sha`
- [x] Clear `in_progress_merge_commit_sha`
- [x] Test / refactor
- [x] Merge conflicts
- [x] Verify workflows
- [x] Developer with 'developer can merge' on:
- [x] Can merge an MR from the Web UI
- [x] Error message for conflicts in the Web UI
- [x] Cannot merge an MR from the command line (HTTP)
- [x] Cannot merge an MR from the command line (SSH)
- [x] Cannot modify the branch otherwise
- [x] Developer with 'developer can merge' off:
- [x] Cannot merge an MR from the Web UI
- [x] Error message for conflicts in the Web UI
- [x] Cannot merge an MR from the command line (HTTP)
- [x] Cannot merge an MR from the command line (SSH)
- [x] Cannot modify the branch otherwise
- [x] New projects created could have have "Developers can merge" turned on automatically for the default branch
- [x] CHANGELOG
- [x] Fix build
- [x] Wait for [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/42624e3d53754064186d4ae9048e310d1d3eed0b/builds) to pass
- [x] Screenshots
- [x] Assign to endboss
- [x] Respond to @dbalexandre's comments
- [x] Duplicated line, this is equals to line 26.
- [x] We aren't using any of these helpers in this migration, we can remove the include.
- [x] What do you think to add a default value for this column to avoid the Three-state Boolean Problem?
- [x] group all checks under Gitlab::Checks
- [x] You have a default value for developers_can_merge column, but your migration doesn't add it.
- [x] What do you think to rename Partially protected to anything else?
- [x] Fix conflicts
- [x] Make sure [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/b1cfd42f20a78fd7f844288954e97cff32962e20/builds) passes
- [ ] Wait for merge
See merge request !4892
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
1. Fix typos, minor styling errors.
2. Use single quotes rather than double quotes in `user_access_spec`.
3. Test formatting.
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
1. Don't use case statements for dispatch anymore. This leads to a lot
of duplication, and makes the logic harder to follow.
2. Remove duplicated logic.
- For example, the `can_push_to_branch?` exists, but we also have a
different way of checking the same condition within `change_access_check`.
- This kind of duplication is removed, and the `can_push_to_branch?`
method is used in both places.
3. Move checks returning true/false to `UserAccess`.
- All public methods in `GitAccess` now return an instance of
`GitAccessStatus`. Previously, some methods would return
true/false as well, which was confusing.
- It makes sense for these kinds of checks to be at the level of a
user, so the `UserAccess` class was repurposed for this. The prior
`UserAccess.allowed?` classmethod is converted into an instance
method.
- All external uses of these checks have been migrated to use the
`UserAccess` class
4. Move the "change_access_check" into a separate class.
- Create the `GitAccess::ChangeAccessCheck` class to run these
checks, which are quite substantial.
- `ChangeAccessCheck` returns an instance of `GitAccessStatus` as
well.
5. Break out the boolean logic in `ChangeAccessCheck` into `if/else`
chains - this seems more readable.
6. I can understand that this might look like overkill for !4892, but I
think this is a good opportunity to clean it up.
- http://martinfowler.com/bliki/OpportunisticRefactoring.html
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
1. When a merge request is being merged, save the merge commit SHA in
the `in_progress_merge_commit_sha` database column.
2. The `pre-receive` hook looks for any locked (in progress) merge
request with `in_progress_merge_commit_sha` matching the `newrev` it
is passed.
3. If it finds a matching MR, the merge is legitimate.
4. Update `git_access_spec` to test the behaviour we added here. Also
refactored this spec a bit to make it easier to add more contexts / conditions.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
- Cherry-picked from `mvestergaard:branch-protection-dev-merge`
- https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/4220
|
|/
|
|
| |
Rails.cache.read_multi
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Render inline diffs for multiple changed lines following eachother
Before:

After:

See merge request !5174
|
| | |
|
|\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Avoid `describe`-ing symbols in specs
See merge request !5195
|
| | | |
|
|\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Fix GitHub client requests when rate limit is disabled
## What does this MR do?
GitHub Rate Limit API returns 404 when the rate limit is disabled. In this case we just want to return gracefully instead of spitting out an error.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was this MR needed?
GitHub importer fails when rate limit is disabled in GitHub Enterprise.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/697
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [X] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry 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)
- [ ] 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 !5191
|
| | | | |
|
| |/ / |
|
|/ / |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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
|
|\ \
| | |
| | |
| | | |
fix/import-event-error
|
| |\ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Remove slow migration and add fix to sanitize errors
Getting rid of the slow migration and preventing the Error to occur
Fixes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/19608
See merge request !5176
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Add blockquote fence syntax to Markdown
Fixes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/16564
Before Markdown rendering happens, this will transform this:
```
Let me quote this here email:
>>>
Dear friend,
How are you?
Greetings,
Me
>>>
```
Into this, saving me from having to prefix all of those lines with `>` manually when I copy some multiline text from another medium:
```
Let me quote this here email:
> Dear friend,
>
> How are you?
>
> Greetings,
>
> Me
```
See merge request !3954
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | |/
| | |/| |
|
| |/ /
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
This caches various queries to ensure that multiple reference extraction
runs re-use any objects queried in previous runs.
|
| |\ \
| | |/
| |/|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Fix: Infinity Bug in Commit Statistics
## What does this MR do?
It fixes a logic bug in the commits statistics: The code assumed that the amount of days involved in a commit range is equal to the difference between the first and last date. This is not true, though, as (from a human standpoint), a commit yesterday and a commit today involve two days, not one. Similarly, a fresh project with only commits made today already 'used' one day.
Since the number of involved days used to be zero for new projects, the result for commits per day quite often amounted to `Infinity`…
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
The test file. I hope it is up to the standards of GitLab.
## Why was this MR needed?
The bug occurres especially for new users with their first project while exploring GitLab.
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
This bug was reported as #1548.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
See merge request !4231
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
fixes #1548
|
| |\ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Allow specifying protected branches using wildcards
Closes #18627
# Tasks
- [ ] #18627 !4665 Allow specifying protected branches using wildcards
- [x] Find existing usages of protected branches
- Protecting branches
- `ProtectedBranchesController` is used to mark a branch protected/unprotected
- `API::Branches` can be used to mark a branch protected/unprotected
- Enforcing branch protection
- `Gitlab::GitAccess` has helpers (`can_push_to_branch?`, `check`) that are used to deny pushes if a branch is protected
- Over SSH: `gitlab-shell` receives a push, and calls `/allowed` on the GitLab API, which calls `GitAccess.check`
- Over HTTP:
- `gitlab-workhorse` receives the request, and forwards it to rails
- Rails (in the `GitHttpController#git-recieve-pack`) runs basic checks (is the user logged in, not protected branch checks) and returns ok with `GL_ID` and `RepoPath`
- `gitlab-workhorse` looks at the response, and calls the relevant `gitlab-shell` action from `git-http/handlePostRPC`
- Rest of this flow is the same as the SSH flow above
- [x] Implementation
- [x] Backend
- [x] Change `project#protected_branch?` to look at wildcard protected branches
- [x] Change `project#developers_can_push_to_protected_branch?`
- [x] Change `project#open_branches`
- [x] Better error message when creating a disallowed branch from the Web UI
- [x] Frontend
- [x] Protected branches page should allow typing out a wildcard pattern
- [x] Add help text explaining the use of wildcards
- [x] Show matching branches for each protected branch
- [x] ~~On the index page~~
- [x] On a show page
- [x] Index?
- [x] Can't have the "last commit" column for wildcard protected branches
- [x] Fix / write tests
- [x] What happens if a hook is missing in dev?
- [x] Refactor
- [x] Test workflows
- Create a branch matching a wildcard pattern
- Push to a branch matching a wildcard pattern
- Force push to a branch matching a wildcard pattern
- Delete a branch matching a wildcard pattern
- [x] Test using Web UI
- [x] Test over SSH
- [x] Test over HTTP
- [x] Test as developer and master
- [x] Investigate performance
- [x] Test with a large number of protected branches / branches
- [x] Paginate list of protected branches
- [x] ~~Possibly rewrite `open_branches`~~
- [x] Add `iid`s to existing `ProtectedBranch`es
- [x] Add documentation
- [x] Add CHANGELOG entry
- [x] Add screenshots
- [x] Make sure [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/2f753e3ed2ce681b4444944d521f4419e8ed37f7/builds) passes
- [x] Assign to endboss for review
- [x] Address @DouweM's comments
- [x] `protected_branch_params`
- [x] `exact_match` instead of `explicit_match`
- [x] When would self.name be blank?
- [x] Move `protected_branches.each` to a partial
- [x] Move `matching_branches.each` to a partial
- [x] If the branch is in @matching_branches, it's not been removed
- [x] move this regex to a method and memoize it
- [x] `commit_sha` directly for exact matches
- [x] Number of matches for wildcard matches, with a link
- [x] Wait for [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/43f9ce0e88194b8f719bb1c1e656b7fc13278d56/builds) to pass
- [x] Respond to @DouweM's comments
- [x] Don't use iid
- [x] Controller should use `@project.protected_branches.new`
- [x] move the memoization to `def wildcard_regex`
- [x] render with `collection: @protected_branches`
- [x] Wait for [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/f7beedf122fa0c7aa89e86181fe7499321fb10ca/builds) to pass
- [x] Wait for @DouweM's review
- [x] Wait for @jschatz1's review
- [x] Respond to @jschatz1's comments
- [x] Use the new dropdown style
- [x] description should be moved to the description section without the styling
- [x] Protect button should be disabled when no branch is selected
- [x] Update screenshots
- [x] Merge conflicts
- [x] Make sure [build](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/commit/20f3cfe8d5540eab64c2ba548043d600b28c61ba/builds) passes
- [ ] Revisit performance, possibly with staging/production data
- [ ] Get a dump of staging / run against staging live
- [ ] Get SSH access to staging
- [ ] Wait for review/merge
# Screenshots
## Creating wildcard protected branches




### Using the `GLDropdown` component

## Enforcing wildcard protected branches
### From the Web UI

### Over SSH

### Over HTTPS

## Listing matching branches

See merge request !4665
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Note: This feature was developed independently on master while this was
in review. I've removed the conflicting bits and left the relevant
additions, mainly a test for `Gitlab::Git::Hook`. The original commit
message follows:
1. `gitlab-shell` outputs errors to `stderr`, but we weren't using this
information, prior to this commit. Now we capture the `stderr`, and
display it in the flash message when branch creation fails.
2. This can be used to display better errors for other git operation
failures with small tweaks.
3. The return value of `Gitlab::Git::Hook#trigger` is changed from a
simple `true`/`false` to a tuple of `[status, errors]`. All usages
and tests have been updated to reflect this change.
4. This is only relevant to branch creation _from the Web UI_, since SSH
and HTTP pushes access `gitlab-shell` either directly or through
`gitlab-workhorse`.
5. A few minor changes need to be made on the `gitlab-shell` end. Right
now, the `stderr` message it outputs is prefixed by "GitLab: ", which
shows up in our flash message. This is better removed.
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
consistent
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
expects and make the `protocol` param in `GitAccess` mandatory.
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
info.
|
| |\ \ \
| | |/ /
| |/| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Move global ci entries handling from legacy to new config
## What does this MR do?
This MR moves responsibility of handling global CI config entries (like `image`, `services`), from legacy `GitlabCiYamlProcessor` to new CI Config
## Why was this MR needed?
This is the next iteration of CI configuration refactoring
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#15060
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- 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)
See merge request !4820
|