GitLab FOSS merge requestshttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests2018-11-05T03:09:08Zhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/14762WIP: Resolve "Issue with labels"2018-11-05T03:09:08ZMek StittriWIP: Resolve "Issue with labels"## What does this MR do?
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs....## What does this MR do?
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/changelog.html) added, if necessary
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/doc_styleguide.html)
- [ ] 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](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/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?
Closes #42004James RamsayJames Ramsayhttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/12771Adds message to the wiki page creation hook2017-09-11T15:17:49Zusername-removed-945495Adds message to the wiki page creation hookHello, this is my first MR to gitlab and is my take on adding the commit message to a wiki page creating hook, as described by #19301. I'm not sure if I'm testing this in the best place, however I couldn't find a better spot.
~~The p...Hello, this is my first MR to gitlab and is my take on adding the commit message to a wiki page creating hook, as described by #19301. I'm not sure if I'm testing this in the best place, however I couldn't find a better spot.
~~The patch actually does more than simply adding the commit message to the web hook, it also sets the message on the object attributes after it is created.~~ I think it makes sense, a smaller alternative would be simply merging the commit message on `#hook_attrs`. In the end, the simpler alternative seems better, because there is a complex interaction between golumn commit messages and the cached value used as response on `#message`.https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/9768WIP: Expand InternalID to optionally carry a runtime-generated slug, see #287952017-03-24T16:38:40Zusername-removed-426456niv@nwnx.ioWIP: Expand InternalID to optionally carry a runtime-generated slug, see #28795## What does this MR do?
Show the title of models that have a InternalID in the url.
* Works for Issues, Merge Requests, and Milestones.
* Slugs are always lowercase and can only contain a-z, 0-9, and -.
* The slug is generated a...## What does this MR do?
Show the title of models that have a InternalID in the url.
* Works for Issues, Merge Requests, and Milestones.
* Slugs are always lowercase and can only contain a-z, 0-9, and -.
* The slug is generated at runtime when the owning model has a :title attr;
it is not stored on the model.
* The slug generation is in InternalId#make_iid_slug, as the two are closely
linked.
Still missing:
* No link rel=canonical.
* The url in the browser is not updated with replaceState yet when coming from
other places with a old/different slug.
* No specs yet, as specs don't go through to_param so they never see the slug,
as far as I can tell. Should this be changed?
Possibly room for improvement:
* The route constraint RX could maybe be moved elsewhere?
* The model scope/finder (where: iid) still works even with sluggified IIDs
because to_i just truncates after the -. I think this is fine?
* Also, better slug pattern?
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Ah, all of them! I'd like to bounce off for feedback and then work the rest out.
## Why was this MR needed?
Feature request in #28795
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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 [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?
Closes #28795username-removed-426456niv@nwnx.iousername-removed-426456niv@nwnx.iohttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/9538Add shortcuts to go to specific issue or merge request directly2019-09-20T00:37:40Zusername-removed-723067Add shortcuts to go to specific issue or merge request directly## What does this MR do?
Introduces two new keyboard shortcuts:
- <kbd>#</kbd>: opens a modal dialog which prompts the user to input the issue id, and redirects the browser to the according location afterwards.
- <kbd>!</kbd>: same ...## What does this MR do?
Introduces two new keyboard shortcuts:
- <kbd>#</kbd>: opens a modal dialog which prompts the user to input the issue id, and redirects the browser to the according location afterwards.
- <kbd>!</kbd>: same for merge requests
The modal uses a form to trigger the form submission event when pressing ENTER while in the input field, so the user does not have to click on the `OK` button. When dismissing the modal (by pressing <kbd>ESC</kbd> or clicking the close button), no action is taken.
Filters user input to dismiss everything but digits. If an emtpy string is submitted or all characters are filtered out, no action is taken.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Fixes one test expectation in `spec/features/projects/shortcuts_spec.rb` to actually check that the <kbd>i</kbd> shortcut redirects to the new issue path. This shortcut is not part of this MR, but I had problems (see #28307) when running the spec file without this change; I suppose that in the previous version the expectation was instantly fulfilled, as Capybara finds the project's name somewhere on the page, so the test database teardown was started while FactoryGirl was still in the process of creating records.
## Why was this MR needed?
The shortcuts <kbd>g i</kbd> (go to issue list) resp. <kbd>g m</kbd> (go to merge request list) are fine, but sometimes you know which issue or merge request you need, and you need them fast (image your project manager standing behind you).
With this MR, you can open the needed entity only with keyboard shortcut by quickly typing <kbd># 1234 ENTER</kbd>.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
Please see the following .webm file. First the shortcut `#` is used to go to issue no. 4, then the shortcut `!` is used to go to merge request 1. You can also see the modal dialog in the video.
![gitlab-proposal-add-shortcuts.webm](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/uploads/90b7db5b8fa6c4edaa27c26cb9e98a40/gitlab-proposal-add-shortcuts.webm)
## 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)
- 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 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?
Closes #28737username-removed-723067username-removed-723067https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/8687Force update the target branch after the target project changed in MR2017-09-02T08:25:56Zusername-removed-100770Force update the target branch after the target project changed in MR## What does this MR do?
Force update the target branch after the target project changed when creating a new Merge Request.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Compare class in JS may need refacto...## What does this MR do?
Force update the target branch after the target project changed when creating a new Merge Request.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Compare class in JS may need refactoring.
## Why was this MR needed?
Unchanging he target branch even after the target project changed when creating a new Merge Request is convenient for projects that has different default branches than `master`.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![target-branch-selection-in-mr-from-forked-project-gitlab](/uploads/21c97be6ee465898aaaf7c360d8e87ef/target-branch-selection-in-mr-from-forked-project-gitlab.mp4)
## 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
- [ ] 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 #27020https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/8494WIP: Group MR numbers on issue show page by project and namespace2018-06-21T01:27:58Zusername-removed-235897WIP: Group MR numbers on issue show page by project and namespace## What does this MR do?
Groups MRs on the issue show page into those for the current project, those for projects in the namespace, and projects outside of the namespace. This makes the ordering consistent with the work done on #7110.
...## What does this MR do?
Groups MRs on the issue show page into those for the current project, those for projects in the namespace, and projects outside of the namespace. This makes the ordering consistent with the work done on #7110.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
None that I can think of. Maybe if anything, a visual separator between different projects?
## Why was this MR needed?
Consistency with other ordering.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
Old:
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_4.56.14_PM](/uploads/a0ac6f78ce9ee300aefa4cbef4b57529/Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_4.56.14_PM.png)
New:
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_4.52.12_PM](/uploads/58f90aaff123576a4671f32bb01f5647/Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_4.52.12_PM.png)
## 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
- [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 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 #26466https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/8490WIP: Add single-click filters for all, active, stale and protected branches2017-09-12T10:38:50Zusername-removed-9199WIP: Add single-click filters for all, active, stale and protected branches## What does this MR do?
It adds single-click state filters (all, active, stale, protected) for the branches page.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Please check for style.
I haven't included pro...## What does this MR do?
It adds single-click state filters (all, active, stale, protected) for the branches page.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Please check for style.
I haven't included protected branches in 'all' branches. I think it will be necessary, but wanted to double check first, hence WIP.
## Why was this MR needed?
It addresses #17293
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_14.00.36](/uploads/1dbdfb6f2fb2e7fcd59080fcce8499b8/Screen_Shot_2017-01-08_at_14.00.36.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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
- [ ] All builds are passing
- [x] 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?
Closes #1729310.3https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/8487Add wiki templates2017-06-07T19:11:23Zusername-removed-790846Add wiki templates## What does this MR do?
It adds Wiki Templates as proposed in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/25182 by making WikiPage a little similar to an Issuable (MergeRequest and Issue) and reusing the Issuable's templating logic ...## What does this MR do?
It adds Wiki Templates as proposed in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/25182 by making WikiPage a little similar to an Issuable (MergeRequest and Issue) and reusing the Issuable's templating logic existing code. As @smcgivern commented out https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/25182#note_20543250 the templates goes into the wiki's repo inside `.gitlab/wiki_templates` folder.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Some thoughts that crossed my mind while I was coding:
* Extracting another module (probably called Templatable) from Issuable maybe better semantically due WikiPage not being an Issuable
* Extracting copy_wiki_repo and copy_repo similarities into a better method.
* I'm pretty sure format isn't the best label for template and markdown.
## Why was this MR needed?
Because it's a step to enhance built-in wiki functionality.
## Screenshots
### Before
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-07_at_7.46.47_PM](/uploads/12a328dce93333570f578fbc9bbe8b26/Screen_Shot_2017-01-07_at_7.46.47_PM.png)
### After
#### Edit
#### New without template files
![new_no_template](/uploads/6f973f7a702bab30b6db68eab9496987/new_no_template.png)
#### New with template and small
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.47_PM](/uploads/770bd19d520096cf2547d4b290ea4d48/Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.47_PM.png)
#### New with template and medium
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.32_PM](/uploads/1583a5623a84ad6504d31de628a384c1/Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.32_PM.png)
#### New with template and large
![Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.17_PM](/uploads/42d26b4418dab3ec80abd2a437876fd5/Screen_Shot_2017-01-14_at_9.24.17_PM.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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
- [ ] 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`
- [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-ce/issues/25182https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/8388Remember unsaved wiki changes using autosave.js2017-01-24T19:06:46Zusername-removed-52628Remember unsaved wiki changes using autosave.js## What does this MR do?
Save unsaved edits in a wiki page in browser's local storage using autosave.js.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitla...## What does this MR do?
Save unsaved edits in a wiki page in browser's local storage using autosave.js.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/24738
## Screenshots (if relevant)
![TestEditingWiki](/uploads/0d1c5b1828f17f9e9258d4fc2bf8ceb4/TestEditingWiki.gif)
![TestCreatingWiki](/uploads/5c417bb95d74b4329338d2490a246781/TestCreatingWiki.gif)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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 [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?
#24738username-removed-52628username-removed-52628https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7965Create a parent class to group Todos2017-08-18T08:48:15Zusername-removed-843590Create a parent class to group Todos## What does this MR do?
This MR is the first step on implementing #24978, which will group todos on todo events, to help fix the problem where you don't get a new todo if you have an active one for the same event.
The first part I imp...## What does this MR do?
This MR is the first step on implementing #24978, which will group todos on todo events, to help fix the problem where you don't get a new todo if you have an active one for the same event.
The first part I implemented was the data, as having valid data to work with helps a lot when creating the other parts.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
This MR is still under development, so there's still lots of work to do.
As of now, the following is implemented:
* A new model called TodoEvent
* A migration to both create the new `todo_events` and populate the `todo_event_id` field on `todos`. This migration was handwritten to optimize both run (wall) time and reduce the number of locks, so the code is more complex than what's necessary.
There are still no tests, they are going to be added ASAP, and things might break on the migration, so more attention is necessary.
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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 [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?
Closes #24978https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7540Resolve "Create release notes from closed milestone"2017-03-17T11:06:31Zusername-removed-804721Resolve "Create release notes from closed milestone"* Add a button "New Release Tag" to milestones/show if the milestone status is closed and no release tag has been created.
![Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.23_PM](/uploads/8f3d636aa0e7044f5034e4d4df412360/Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13....* Add a button "New Release Tag" to milestones/show if the milestone status is closed and no release tag has been created.
![Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.23_PM](/uploads/8f3d636aa0e7044f5034e4d4df412360/Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.23_PM.png)
![Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.38_PM](/uploads/f6c714ddfcc79ffe5fcf2d67c222cc21/Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.38_PM.png)
* Add a link to milestones/show description with the release tag (if exists)
![Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.14.22_PM](/uploads/8216ba32f1ad087797682c6bd88fba4a/Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.14.22_PM.png)
* The tag's description includes the open and closed issues for that milestone.
![Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.55_PM](/uploads/0380d342bf6d154221259c0b7b0333dc/Screen_Shot_2016-11-26_at_1.13.55_PM.png)
Left todo:
* Add integration specs.
* When I click to create a new tag but give up and click cancel, it should return to `milestone#show` instead of `tags#index`.
* Replace the inline fields with a Tag model. This wasn't done because would demand a big refactor on other parts of the system, for example in `CreateTagService`, and I'd never make a big change like this without creating specs (which the time constraints wouldn't allow me to).
* Even better release notes description formatting.
* The extras (Like grouping by labels).
Closes #24260https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7337WIP: Resolves "Allow expanding context lines on MR Discussion tab"2017-02-28T14:56:04Zusername-removed-30516WIP: Resolves "Allow expanding context lines on MR Discussion tab"## What does this MR do?
- [x] Part A: expand diff above nested discussion
- [x] Part B: display some context lines below nested discussion and expand diff below (hopefully)
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double ...## What does this MR do?
- [x] Part A: expand diff above nested discussion
- [x] Part B: display some context lines below nested discussion and expand diff below (hopefully)
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Handling of `plain` via `data-*` and `UploadForm`.
cc @DouweM @smcgivern
## Why was this MR needed?
Assymetric functionality between `Discussion` and `Changes` tabs.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
Before: ![before](/uploads/321701121a3b9cd37a4e8e4131d73f10/before.png)
After (ellipsis): ![after_collapsed](/uploads/fea5f92c85a5c48fea1351785db61afa/after_collapsed.png)
After (expanded): ![after_expanded](/uploads/29460a1aaec250bcc8b63c06265b0eb9/after_expanded.png)
After (middle): ![after_middle](/uploads/d0644e9d28789149d1a8e64990c77612/after_middle.png)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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
- [ ] 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #24138https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7310WIP: Use a new table for user contribution stats2017-10-04T17:02:23Zusername-removed-714523WIP: Use a new table for user contribution stats## What does this MR do?
It defers the user contribution stats to a new table, instead of the events table.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
This will allow down sizing th...## What does this MR do?
It defers the user contribution stats to a new table, instead of the events table.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
This will allow down sizing the events table.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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 [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?
#22623Backloghttps://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/7214WIP: Make global milestones editable2017-03-27T16:44:29Zusername-removed-338156WIP: Make global milestones editable## Work in Progress — TODO
The first commit is the result of a sprint to get a working implementation that allows users to edit global milestones. The immediate next step is to add test coverage and then polish with a thorough refactor....## Work in Progress — TODO
The first commit is the result of a sprint to get a working implementation that allows users to edit global milestones. The immediate next step is to add test coverage and then polish with a thorough refactor. Below are the areas I will continue working on:
- [ ] Add integration specs to test various cases
- [ ] Proper authorization constraints
- [ ] Editing title, due date, description, and projects
- [ ] Proper removal/addition of projects to global milestones (focused caution on removing a project from a milestone)
- [ ] Add validation/error feedback to edit page (e.g. raise error if all projects are removed during edit)
- [ ] Remove duplication between [edit](app/views/groups/milestones/edit.html.haml)/[new](app/views/groups/milestones/new.html.haml) forms
- [ ] Revisit using `@milestone.for_display` for the edit form. Perhaps a method alias would be appropriate.
- [ ] Extract [GroupsMilestones#update](app/controllers/groups/milestones_controller.rb]) functionality into its proper service (I'd also like to explore different strategies to best handle removing/adding projects). For now, I've used the "extract method" pattern within the controller to keep `#update` organized and easier to refactor.
- [ ] Revisit copy on the global milestone [edit page](app/views/groups/milestones/edit.html.haml)
- [ ] Adhere to standard MR requirements
---
## What does this MR do?
Allows global milestones to be editable so that the title, description, due date, and projects may be globally modified.
***Key points of interest:***
- Title, description, and due date changes will overwrite any individual changes that may have been made to the global milestone _within_ a project.
- Projects can be added/removed from a global milestone
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
- [ ] Edge cases and authorization
- [ ] Make sure the copy on the global milestone edit page clearly informs the user that changes will overwrite any changes that have been made with a global milestone within a project.
## Why was this MR needed?
Will make it simple for users to modify global milestones that have numerous projects. Without this MR, one must edit each project individually to modify a milestone.
For example, users can now edit the description of a global milestone instead of needing to update the milestone description within each project.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [ ] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md) 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 [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?
Closes #20543
/cc @smcgivern @DouweMusername-removed-338156username-removed-338156https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/6752Remove `Sidekiq::Testing.fake!`2017-03-22T08:51:01Zusername-removed-760723Remove `Sidekiq::Testing.fake!`## What does this MR do?
Fix https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22992
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Its not possible to use `perform_enqueued_jobs` because the gitlab workers do...## What does this MR do?
Fix https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22992
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Its not possible to use `perform_enqueued_jobs` because the gitlab workers does not use ActiveJob API, gitlab sidekiq workers have to first migrate to ActiveJob, cf https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq/wiki/Active-Job
## Why was this MR needed?
See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22992
## 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)
- [ ] 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?
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22992username-removed-128633username-removed-128633https://staging.gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/merge_requests/4887make all thumbs count2017-09-12T11:01:15Zusername-removed-475181make all thumbs count## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #14169 ## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #14169