| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The reason is that Gitea plan to be GitHub-compatible so it makes sense
to just modify GitHubImport a bit for now, and hopefully we can change
it to GitHubishImport once Gitea is 100%-compatible.
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Move admin labels spinach test to RSpec
Part of #23036
See merge request !8166
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23036
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Fix duplicated build token problem importing projects
Reset token so duplicated builds do not thrown an error on import
- [x] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) 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)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
Fixes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23475
See merge request !8171
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Improve icons and style for manual build status
## What does this MR do?
This MR changes the CSS class for manual build status badge to make it a little more different than skipped build status badge. It makes it darker.
## Screenshots
See merge request !8102
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Fix link from doc/development/performance.md to 'Performance Monitoring'
Another link fix!
Fixes link from [doc/development/performance.md](doc/development/performance.md) to 'Gitlab Performance Monitoring'
See merge request !8155
|
| | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Improve pipeline fixtures
## What does this MR do?
Adds missing fixtures to pipelines.
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
## Why was this MR needed?
To improve testability of https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/24710
## 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?
See merge request !7792
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ |
|
| | | | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Fix small typo in CI readme
fix typo
See merge request !8167
|
| | | | | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| |_|_|_|_|_|/ /
|/| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Accept environment variables from the `pre-receive` script
## Summary
1. Starting version 2.11, git changed the way the pre-receive flow works.
- Previously, the new potential objects would be added to the main repo. If the pre-receive passes, the new objects stay in the repo but are linked up. If the pre-receive fails, the new objects stay orphaned in the repo, and are cleaned up during the next `git gc`.
- In 2.11, the new potential objects are added to a temporary "alternate object directory", that git creates for this purpose. If the pre-receive passes, the objects from the alternate object directory are migrated to the main repo. If the pre-receive fails the alternate object directory is simply deleted.
2. In our workflow, the pre-recieve script (in `gitlab-shell`) calls the
`/allowed` endpoint, which calls out directly to git to perform
various checks. These direct calls to git do _not_ have the necessary
environment variables set which allow access to the "alternate object
directory" (explained above). Therefore these calls to git are not able to
access any of the new potential objects to be added during this push.
3. We fix this by accepting the relevant environment variables
(`GIT_ALTERNATE_OBJECT_DIRECTORIES`, `GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY`, and
`GIT_QUARANTINE_PATH`) on the `/allowed` endpoint, and then include
these environment variables while calling out to git.
4. This commit includes these environment variables while making the "force
push" check.
## Issue Numbers
- Closes #25301 (assuming the corresponding `gitlab-shell` MR has been merged in first)
- Corresponding `gitlab-shell` MR: gitlab-org/gitlab-shell!112
- Corresponding EE MR: gitlab-org/gitlab-ee!964
## Tasks
- [#25301/!7967/!112] Git version 2.11.0 - Can't push to protected branch as master or developer
- [x] Investigate
- [x] Implementation
- [x] `force_push.rb` should use the relevant environment variables
- [x] Any other instances of `/allowed` calling out to git directly?
- [x] Verify that the fix works over SSH as well
- [x] Can we trim the number of env variables? Do we need all 3?
- [x] Whitelist variables. Server shouldn't pass through _any_ env variable passed in
- [x] Any security implications?
- [x] Check for force push return code
- [x] Shouldn't be able to opt-out from the force push check by passing an env variable
- [x] Tests
- [x] CE
- [x] Added
- [x] Passing
- [x] Shell
- [x] Added
- [x] Passing
- [x] Meta
- [x] CHANGELOG entry created
- [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master`
- [x] Squashed related commits together
- [x] EE merge request
- [x] Review
- [x] Endboss
- [ ] Follow-up
- [x] Make sure EE is working as expected
- [x] [CE] Gitlab changes without gitlab-shell changes shouldn't raise any exceptions
- [x] [CE] Gitlab-shell changes without gitlab changes shouldn't raise any exceptions
- [x] [EE] Gitlab changes without gitlab-shell changes shouldn't raise any exceptions
- [x] [EE] Gitlab-shell changes without gitlab changes shouldn't raise any exceptions
- [ ] Wait for merge
- [ ] CE
- [ ] EE
- [x] Shell
See merge request !7967
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
- `raise "string"` raises a `RuntimeError` - no need to be explicit
- Remove top-level comment in the `RevList` class
- Use `%w()` instead of `%w[]`
- Extract an `environment_variables` method to cache `env.slice(*ALLOWED_VARIABLES)`
- Use `start_with?` for env variable validation instead of regex match
- Validation specs for each allowed environment variable were identical. Build them dynamically.
- Minor change to `popen3` expectation.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
- Don't define "allowed environment variables" in two places.
- Dispatch to different arities of `Popen.open` without an if/else block.
- Use `described_class` instead of explicitly stating the class name within a
- spec.
- Remove `git_environment_variables_validator_spec` and keep the validation inline.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Previously, we were calling out to `popen` without asserting on the returned
exit-code. Now we raise a `RuntimeError` if the exit code is non-zero.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
The list of environment variables in `Gitlab::Git::RevList` need to be validate
to make sure that they don't reference any other project on disk.
This commit mixes in `ActiveModel::Validations` into `Gitlab::Git::RevList`, and
validates that the environment variables are on the level (using a custom
validator class). If the validations fail, the force push is still executed
without any environment variables set.
Add specs for the validation using shared examples.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
1. Starting version 2.11, git changed the way the pre-receive flow works.
- Previously, the new potential objects would be added to the main repo. If the
pre-receive passes, the new objects stay in the repo but are linked up. If
the pre-receive fails, the new objects stay orphaned in the repo, and are
cleaned up during the next `git gc`.
- In 2.11, the new potential objects are added to a temporary "alternate object
directory", that git creates for this purpose. If the pre-receive passes, the
objects from the alternate object directory are migrated to the main repo. If
the pre-receive fails the alternate object directory is simply deleted.
2. In our workflow, the pre-recieve script (in `gitlab-shell) calls the
`/allowed` endpoint, which calls out directly to git to perform
various checks. These direct calls to git do _not_ have the necessary
environment variables set which allow access to the "alternate object
directory" (explained above). Therefore these calls to git are not able to
access any of the new potential objects to be added during this push.
3. We fix this by accepting the relevant environment variables
(GIT_ALTERNATE_OBJECT_DIRECTORIES, GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY) on the
`/allowed` endpoint, and then include these environment variables while
calling out to git.
4. This commit includes (whitelisted) these environment variables while making
the "force push" check. A `Gitlab::Git::RevList` module is extracted to
prevent `ForcePush` from being littered with these checks.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Allow to use Dockerfile templates
See merge request !7247
|
| | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | |_|_|/ / / /
| | |/| | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Added spec
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Move admin application spinach test to RSpec
Part of #23036
See merge request !8140
|
| | | |_|_|_|_|_|_|/
| |/| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23036
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| |_|_|_|_|/ / / /
|/| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Move admin deploy keys spinach test to RSpec
Part of #23036
See merge request !8141
|
| | |/ / / / / / /
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23036
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Always use `fixture_file_upload` helper to upload files in tests.
## What does this MR do?
Fix a broken spec.
## 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/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?
See merge request !8164
|
| |/ / / / / / / /
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
* Also is not a good idea to use File.open without closing the file
handler. We should use it with a block or close it explicitly.
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Update NGINX configuration files to add websocket support
## What does this MR do?
Changes the bundled NGINX configuration files to support websockets introduced in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-workhorse/merge_requests/83
These changes are also going into omnibus: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab/merge_requests/1146
## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
Best to wait until the omnibus MR is merged as the method may be changed.
## Why was this MR needed?
Without it, NGINX won't let websockets through to workhorse.
## Screenshots (if relevant)
## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?
- [x] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- Tests
- [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)
- [X] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)
## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Related to #22864
See merge request !8039
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Correct mattermost slash commands pretty path
## What does this MR do?
Corrects the pretty path used for mattermost slash commands.
## 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/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?
See merge request !8085
|
