GitLab FOSS merge requestshttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests2019-09-20T03:26:46Zhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7420Added ability to put emojis into repository name2019-09-20T03:26:46Zusername-removed-120563Added ability to put emojis into repository name## What does this MR do?
This merge request added the ability to put some emojis into a repository name.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Ensure that regexp used is correct, I used the following list...## What does this MR do?
This merge request added the ability to put some emojis into a repository name.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Ensure that regexp used is correct, I used the following list: http://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/1.0/emoji-data.txt
## Why was this MR needed?
This is not a mandatory MR but it should be cool as it is in the mood now to use emojis on repository names.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
This is not possible actually:
![screen](/uploads/c55bcb6d870ba8570643532d264a5a21/screen.jpg)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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
- [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?8.14username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12451Drop GFM support for the title of Milestone/MergeReuqest in template2019-09-20T03:17:37Zusername-removed-100770Drop GFM support for the title of Milestone/MergeReuqest in template## What does this MR do?
Drop GFM support for the title of Milestone/MergeReuqest in templates.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was this MR needed?
The title in Milestone/MergeReuqest i...## What does this MR do?
Drop GFM support for the title of Milestone/MergeReuqest in templates.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was this MR needed?
The title in Milestone/MergeReuqest is expected as plain, not as markdown, like in other occurrences. This MR keeps it consistent with them.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [n/a] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] API support added
- Tests
- [n/a] 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` (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?
Closes #343099.4username-removed-443319username-removed-443319https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12444Drop GFM support for issuable title on milestone2019-09-20T03:17:37Zusername-removed-100770Drop GFM support for issuable title on milestone## What does this MR do?
Drop GFM support for issuable title on milestone, which was introduced in 2012 (GitLab 3.1) and has made it inconsistent.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was thi...## What does this MR do?
Drop GFM support for issuable title on milestone, which was introduced in 2012 (GitLab 3.1) and has made it inconsistent.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was this MR needed?
- To keep it consistent with other occurrences as GFM support is not introduced in any other occurrence of issuable title.
- To keep it faster using `link_to` instead of `link_to_gfm`.
- e.g., a milestone with ~ 100 issues on my local laptop (GDK): 25x faster :airplane: (`2228 ms -> 88 ms`)
## Screenshots (if relevant)
### as is
`#4` is linked.
![issuable-title-on-milestone-as-is](/uploads/60538f33a033106066098dc6bea4b5ae/issuable-title-on-milestone-as-is.png)
### fixed
`#4` is not linked but just treated as plan text.
![issuable-title-on-milestone-to-be](/uploads/01bc00ea1e554ed8100e3d95564f0519/issuable-title-on-milestone-to-be.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [n/a] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] API support added
- Tests
- [n/a] 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` (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?
Closes #342899.4username-removed-443319username-removed-443319https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12900Use only CSS to truncate commit message in blame2019-09-20T03:17:37Zusername-removed-100770Use only CSS to truncate commit message in blame## What does this MR do?
Changes to use pure CSS to truncate commit message in blame.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
~~While I chose `450px` as `max-width` to took care fluid layout including...## What does this MR do?
Changes to use pure CSS to truncate commit message in blame.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
~~While I chose `450px` as `max-width` to took care fluid layout including author's intention of !6218, what do you think is the best for `td.blame-commit` in `files.scss`?~~
While I finally chose `400px` as `max-width` to took care fluid layout including author's intention of !6218, what do you think is the best for `td.blame-commit` in `files.scss`?
## Why was this MR needed?
While this bug has existed since 2012 (34cea1cb, 9cd8f7b0), we should fix it to keep UX better.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
| before | after |
| ------ | ----- |
| ![blame-truncate-before](/uploads/9bdf18e4cbd27ca37d4d75a60a63fe23/blame-truncate-before.png) | ![blame-truncate-after-v2](/uploads/4d9aacbad1e1f89d8230879a3222ccae/blame-truncate-after-v2.png) |
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [n/a] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] API support added
- Tests
- [ ] 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` (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?
Closes #351639.5https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/11268Sync email address from specified omniauth provider2019-09-20T03:06:57Zusername-removed-1113013Sync email address from specified omniauth provider## What does this MR do?
Provides option to sync a user's email address from omniauth provider email. When configured, the user's primary email address is not editable and is synced on sign-in. We intend it for use with auto_sign_in_with...## What does this MR do?
Provides option to sync a user's email address from omniauth provider email. When configured, the user's primary email address is not editable and is synced on sign-in. We intend it for use with auto_sign_in_with_provider and allow_single_sign_on configured to the same provider.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I have tested these code changes with cas3 and github omniauth. I'm not sure if there are concerns with other auth strategies.
## Why was this MR needed?
We have our GitLab instance configured for single sign-on with another application. We want to ensure our users' email addresses in GitLab always match their email address in the other application.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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` (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?9.3Douwe MaanDouwe Maanhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12509Resolve "Project option to allow customizing CI/CD config path"2019-09-20T03:03:50Zusername-removed-423915Resolve "Project option to allow customizing CI/CD config path"## What does this MR do?
Add an option to customize CI/CD config path (default `.gitlab-ci.yml`)
## Why was this MR needed?
This is a follow up from !5682, please check the description and discussion there.
## Screenshots (if relevan...## What does this MR do?
Add an option to customize CI/CD config path (default `.gitlab-ci.yml`)
## Why was this MR needed?
This is a follow up from !5682, please check the description and discussion there.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![Screen_Shot_2017-06-30_at_14.40.18](/uploads/338cfe3feb6d14c7f8a140c20b4a2fdf/Screen_Shot_2017-06-30_at_14.40.18.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [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 [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?
Closes #32815
/cc @muteor9.4Grzegorz BizonGrzegorz Bizonhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/11728Wrong data type when testing webhooks2019-09-20T03:02:31Zusername-removed-43728Wrong data type when testing webhooks## What does this MR do?
Implement specified test hook data for each hook type
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![](https://cl.ly/2f3r2o3B1F0v/Image%202017-06-16%20at%201...## What does this MR do?
Implement specified test hook data for each hook type
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![](https://cl.ly/2f3r2o3B1F0v/Image%202017-06-16%20at%2017.35.46.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [x] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] 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` (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?
Closes #59719.5username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/10378Promote blameless culture by using "annotate" instead2019-09-20T02:58:26Zusername-removed-436707Promote blameless culture by using "annotate" instead## What does this MR do?
It helps promote blameless culture in software development teams.
The verb "Blame" in UI is replaced by "Annotate".
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I have made the easiest ...## What does this MR do?
It helps promote blameless culture in software development teams.
The verb "Blame" in UI is replaced by "Annotate".
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I have made the easiest part — UI texts. Please let me know if I should proceed and change "blame" to "annotate" in other parts of the application:
- [ ] URI paths
- [ ] Class names
- [ ] everywhere else
## Why was this MR needed?
The verb "blame" encourages developers to, well, blame their colleagues for mistakes. This is easy. But this is unhealthy and useless. We should strive to promote the culture of understanding and teamwork instead.
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- [x] 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)
- [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?
None. I have started with this PR right away.9.3username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12105Provide hint to create a personal access token for Git over HTTP2019-09-20T02:55:49Zusername-removed-1113013Provide hint to create a personal access token for Git over HTTP## What does this MR do?
If internal auth is disabled and logged in user is not an LDAP user, present him with a reminder to create a personal access token to push or pull the project. Only show if user does not already have an active...## What does this MR do?
If internal auth is disabled and logged in user is not an LDAP user, present him with a reminder to create a personal access token to push or pull the project. Only show if user does not already have an active, non-impersonation personal access token. This is the web UI counterpart to https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/11986.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No.
## Why was this MR needed?
Our GitLab instance is configured to use CAS authentication only; internal auth/sign-in is disabled. Our biggest support issue since we have gone into production is that users are trying to perform Git over HTTP authentication with their external credentials, rather than a personal access token. With this code change, users will have an indicator in the web UI to push them toward PAT creation.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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` (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?9.4username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12670N+1 problems on milestone page2019-09-20T02:46:32Zusername-removed-100770N+1 problems on milestone page## What does this MR do?
Fixes N+1 problems on a project milestone page as follows:
1. Avoid to repeat namespace querying on project milestone (cf. !10871)
1. Remove issuable drag-n-drop and sorting from milestone view completely ...## What does this MR do?
Fixes N+1 problems on a project milestone page as follows:
1. Avoid to repeat namespace querying on project milestone (cf. !10871)
1. Remove issuable drag-n-drop and sorting from milestone view completely (introduced in !7113 (#13670), but later incompletely removed in !11950)
1. Remove some pieces of duplicated code
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
No
## Why was this MR needed?
A project milestone page is very slow. e.g., https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/milestones/37
## Screenshots (if relevant)
No
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [n/a] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] API support added
- Tests
- [n/a] 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` (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?
Closes #347369.4Douwe MaanDouwe Maanhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/11573Support multiple Redis instances based on queue type2019-09-20T02:44:04Zusername-removed-178117techguru@byiq.comSupport multiple Redis instances based on queue type### Proposed implementation for https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/30392 support for multiple Redis key value stores
* Add support for multiple key-value stores
* allows different policies for retention, backup, dep...### Proposed implementation for https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/30392 support for multiple Redis key value stores
* Add support for multiple key-value stores
* allows different policies for retention, backup, deployment topologies by key namespace
* Abstract key-value store name away from name of underlying technology such as "Redis"
* note that config files, unix port numbers, and unix sockets for communication with Redis have been cloned and reconfigured
---
* this MR is primarily submitted for review of
* design approach
* scope of changes
* size of MR (1000+ lines -- could be broken into a few smaller step-wise pieces)
* GDK testing can be performed with [WIP MR for gdk](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-development-kit/merge_requests/298)
* the Gitlab::Redis class was deliberately removed/deprecated to force the runtime to find any uses that were not readily apparent from grep/search of git repository
* the modified GDK launches 3 separate KV servers (redis instances at present moment) and wraps each instance in a separate class (Cache, Queues, SharedState), each with bindings to appropriate namespaces within the KV store.
* the modified CI launches 1 redis instance, and assigns each KV store to a different `database number`
---
### Areas considered:
* [x] CI support
* [x] Build Support - deferred to issue gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab#2389
* [x] Deployment (Omnibus) - deferred to issue gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab#2389
* [x] Developer Support (GDK) - deferred to issue gitlab-org/gitlab-development-kit#238
* [x] Documentation
* [x] retention policy for different namespaces
* [x] abstract class between new KV objects and Redis for shared behaviors
* [x] Migration from single instance to multiple instances - deferred to issue gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#33185
- deferred to issue gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#33181 - ~~* [ ] using atomic transactions~~
- deferred to investigation issue gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#33182 - ~~* [ ] whether certain key-values can be local to one FE node, or MUST be shared with other FE nodes~~
- deferred to release management process - ~~* [ ] Changelog~~
- deferred - ~~* [ ] using actual Model objects for encapsulation of underlying technology~~
- deferred - ~~* [ ] support for key-value pairs to participate in Rails Transactions with rollback on exception~~
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/33182
### Partially solves:
* gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#30392
### See also:
* [WIP MR for gdk](gitlab-org/gitlab-development-kit!298) required for testing on laptop
* https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce
* https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee
* https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab
* gitlab-com/infrastructure#1682
* gitlab-com/infrastructure#1631
* gitlab-com/infrastructure#1802
* gitlab-com/infrastructure#1575
* gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#33113
9.5Robert SpeicherRobert Speicherhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12057Prevent Description Change Notes When Toggling Tasks2019-09-20T02:39:15Zusername-removed-441905Prevent Description Change Notes When Toggling Tasks## What does this MR do?
Stop showing the "description updated" system note when task items are toggled.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
There is an intentional TODO for an edge case that shou...## What does this MR do?
Stop showing the "description updated" system note when task items are toggled.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
There is an intentional TODO for an edge case that should receive duplicate notes. See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/32834#note_31084045 and https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/32834#note_31258514.
## Why was this MR needed?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/10392 recently added system notes for description changes, and did not take into account that there was already a system note for description updates created by the task list.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
**Before**
![Screen_Shot_2017-06-09_at_10.23.18_AM](/uploads/f6190fa88f1922491742cd52b2c1d9e6/Screen_Shot_2017-06-09_at_10.23.18_AM.png)
**After**
![Screen_Shot_2017-06-09_at_10.24.05_AM](/uploads/6a1c6db2a8047aad572d8f843a85ce3e/Screen_Shot_2017-06-09_at_10.24.05_AM.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- ~~[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
- ~~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?
Closes #328349.4username-removed-443319username-removed-443319https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/13778Extract AutocompleteController#users into finder2019-09-20T01:43:24Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comExtract AutocompleteController#users into finder## What does this MR do?
fixes #24121
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Name of class `YetAnotherUsersFinder`. Think that we can choose another one.
## Why was this MR needed?
## Screenshots (if re...## What does this MR do?
fixes #24121
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Name of class `YetAnotherUsersFinder`. Think that we can choose another one.
## Why was this MR needed?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- [x] Tests added for this feature/bug
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?10.1Grzegorz BizonGrzegorz Bizonhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/14152Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 132019-09-20T01:43:24Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 13## What does this MR do?
- refactor `lib/gitlab/conflict/parser.rb:14:7`
- refactor `lib/gitlab/mail_room.rb:22:7`
- decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 13
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
##...## What does this MR do?
- refactor `lib/gitlab/conflict/parser.rb:14:7`
- refactor `lib/gitlab/mail_room.rb:22:7`
- decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 13
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It's fourth step for #31362
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#31362
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek @blackst0ne @rspeicher
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge ~"static analysis"10.1Robert SpeicherRobert Speicherhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/13972Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 142019-09-20T01:43:24Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 14## What does this MR do?
- refactor `app/helpers/projects_helper.rb:21:3`
- refactor `app/services/ci/create_pipeline_service.rb:50:5`
- decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 14
## Are there points in the code the reviewer ...## What does this MR do?
- refactor `app/helpers/projects_helper.rb:21:3`
- refactor `app/services/ci/create_pipeline_service.rb:50:5`
- decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 14
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It's third step for #31362
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#31362
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek @blackst0ne @rspeicher
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge ~"static analysis"10.0username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/13905Decrease Metrics/CyclomaticComplexity threshold to 152019-09-20T01:43:24Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Metrics/CyclomaticComplexity threshold to 15## What does this MR do?
* Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 15
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
check Cyclomatic Complexity in CE and EE (for now there are no offences in CE or EE fo...## What does this MR do?
* Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 15
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
check Cyclomatic Complexity in CE and EE (for now there are no offences in CE or EE for this threshold)
## Why was this MR needed?
It's second step for #31362
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#31362
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge10.0Robert SpeicherRobert Speicherhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/10928Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 162019-09-20T01:43:24Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 16## What does this MR do?
- Refactor `lib/gitlab/google_code_import/importer.rb:163:7`
- Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 16
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It'...## What does this MR do?
- Refactor `lib/gitlab/google_code_import/importer.rb:163:7`
- Decrease Cyclomatic Complexity threshold to 16
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It's first step for #31362
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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 it does - 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?
#31362
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge9.2username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/14160Decrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 152019-09-20T01:43:07Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 15## What does this MR do?
- refactor `app/models/event.rb:242:3`
- decrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 15
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It's second step for #3135...## What does this MR do?
- refactor `app/models/event.rb:242:3`
- decrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 15
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
It's second step for #31358
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#31358
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek @blackst0ne @rspeicher
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge ~"static analysis"10.1Robert SpeicherRobert Speicherhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/13947Decrease Metrics/PerceivedComplexity threshold to 172019-09-20T01:43:07Zusername-removed-864731maks.rydkin@gmail.comDecrease Metrics/PerceivedComplexity threshold to 17## What does this MR do?
* Decrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 17
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
check `Metrics/PerceivedComplexity` in CE and EE (for now there are no offences in CE or EE f...## What does this MR do?
* Decrease Perceived Complexity threshold to 17
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
check `Metrics/PerceivedComplexity` in CE and EE (for now there are no offences in CE or EE for this threshold)
## Why was this MR needed?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [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
- Review
- [ ] Has been reviewed by UX
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Frontend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Backend
- [ ] Has been reviewed by Database
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
#31358
/cc @rymai @markglenfletcher @grzesiek @rspeicher
Possible labels: ~"Community Contribution" ~backstage ~Edge ~"static analysis"10.0Grzegorz BizonGrzegorz Bizonhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/9715Database SSL support for backup script.2019-09-20T01:41:48Zusername-removed-204741Database SSL support for backup script.## What does this MR do?
It allows the backup script not to fail for creating DB backups in the case a MySQL/PostgreSQL server using SSL connection is used to host the GitLab database.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer nee...## What does this MR do?
It allows the backup script not to fail for creating DB backups in the case a MySQL/PostgreSQL server using SSL connection is used to host the GitLab database.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Not realy, tested against a SSL-enabled and non-SSL MySQL server and a PostgreSQL one.
## Why was this MR needed?
To fix https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/1440
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [n/a] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [n/a] API support added
- Tests
- [n/a] Added for this feature/bug
- [x] All builds are passing
- [n/a] 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)
- [n/a] 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?
Closes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/1440
## Notes
- MySQL options are those available with [currently used mysql2 adapter gem version](https://github.com/brianmario/mysql2/tree/0.3.20).
- PGSQL options are passed as [connection parameters](http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/ConnectionAdapters/PostgreSQLAdapter.html) to [libpq](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/libpq-connect.html).9.2Achilleas PipinellisAchilleas Pipinellis