| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Don't use HTML ellipsis in EmailsOnPush subject truncated commit message.
Addresses private issue https://dev.gitlab.org/gitlab/gitlabhq/issues/2229.
Since the page is encoded as UTF-8, we don't need HTML entities anymore and can just use the character.
See merge request !521
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |/ |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Remove the invalid key factories
They're only used once each, and they're easy to build in-place.
See merge request !1766
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
They're only used once each, and they're easy to build in-place.
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Allow admin to create public deploy keys that are accessible to any project.
Addresses private issue https://dev.gitlab.org/gitlab/gitlabhq/issues/1774.
Project settings:
The "Public deploy keys" section is only shown when there are any. If there are public deploy keys but no project deploy keys, only public deploy keys are shown. If there are no public deploy keys and no project deploy keys, the current "Deploy keys from projects you have access to will be displayed here" placeholder is shown.
The list of projects below the public key has been changed to only show projects the user has access to.
"Public deploy key" seems to be repeated on the left, but the first is just the title. The label is always visible for public deploy keys.
Admin index:
Admin detail page:
Projects using the deploy key are listed on the left and can be disabled easily.
See merge request !469
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| | |/
|/| |
|
| |/ |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Don't allow username to end in period.
The current behavior doesn't do username referencing and mentioning in sentences like "I discussed with with @douwe." since `douwe.` is matched as a username.
Addresses private issue https://dev.gitlab.org/gitlab/gitlabhq/issues/2174.
See merge request !438
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \ |
|
| | | | |
|
| | |/ |
|
| |/ |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Replace commits calendar with contributions calendar
* count opening of issues and merge requests
* dont trigger git repository - use events from database
* count pushes instead of commits for faster and easier counting
* much-much faster since does not affected by repository size
See merge request !420
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
| |
Closes #1263, #431
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
underscores.
Remove emphasis from system notes to avoid Markdown conflicts in names.
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Add support for external wikis
## What does this MR do?
This MR adds the possibility to replace the link to the internal wiki of gitlab with a custom link.
Currently this is realised as a service.
## What Use Case does this MR solve?
In my Company we already have a wiki System (Confluence).
We have a policy to use the existing wiki, so we can't switch to the internal wiki Gitlab provides.
This currently only leaves us two choices:
1. Disable the gitlab wiki. That means we completly loose the connection between wiki and code from the gitlab ui.
2. Create a simple wiki page with a link to our external wiki and hope that no one uses the internal one.
Both solutions are not really good.
So what can be done to improve the situation while making it as easy as possible for new developers to access both, wiki and gitlab?
Replacing the wiki link kinda like the JIRA integration replaces the issues link looks like a good first step to me. :)
This can probably be extended later to completly prevent access to the internal wiki (currently that's still possible if you know the link) or maybe to check if the link really points to a wiki.
## Screenshot:
See merge request !291
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Restricted visibility levels - bug fix and new feature
This allows admin users to override restricted visibility settings when creating and updating projects and snippets, and moves the restricted visibility configuration from gitlab.yml to the web UI. See #1903.
## Move configuration location
I added a new section to the application settings page for restricted visibility levels. Each level has a checkbox, styled with Bootstrap to look like a toggle button. A checked box means that the level is restricted. I added a glowing text shadow and changed the background color for checked buttons because the default styles made it hard to distinguish between checked and unchecked. This image shows the new section with the "Public" box checked:
## Allow admins to override
To allow admin users to override the restricted visibility levels, I had to remove the `visibility_level` validation from the `Project` class. The model doesn't know about the `current_user`, which should determine whether the restrictions can be overridden. We could use the creator in the validation, but that wouldn't work correctly for projects where a non-admin user is the creator and an admin tries to change the project to a restricted visibility level.
The `Project::UpdateService` and `Project::CreateService` classes already had code to determine whether the current user is allowed to use a given visibility level; now all visibility level validation is done in those classes. Currently, when a non-admin tries to create or update a project using a restricted level, these classes silently set the visibility level to the global default (create) or the project's existing value (update). I changed this behavior to be more like an Active Model validation, where using a restricted level causes the entire request to be rejected.
Project and personal snippets didn't have service classes, and restricted visibility levels weren't being enforced in the model or the controllers. The UI disabled radio buttons for restricted levels, but that wouldn't be difficult to circumvent. I created the `CreateSnippetService` and `UpdateSnippetService` classes to do the same restricted visibility check that the project classes do. And since I was dealing with snippet visibility levels, I updated the API endpoints for project snippets to allow users to set and update the visibility level.
## TODO
* [x] Add more tests for restricted visibility functionality
cc @sytse @dzaporozhets
See merge request !1655
|
| | |\ \
| | |/
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Conflicts:
db/schema.rb
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Add checkboxes to the application settings page for restricted
visibility levels, and remove those settings from gitlab.yml.
|
| | |/
|/| |
|
| |\ \ |
|
| | |/
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
every email address the user has associated with his account.
This fixes one of the problems mentioned in gitlab-org/gitlab-ce#1162 and makes the behavior of the commit calendar as described in the profile.
"All email addresses will be used to identify your commits."
|
| |/ |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Normalize output to use:
- User name instead of username
- Include first line of title in message description
- Link to "Issue #X" instead of "#X"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Supports four different event types all bundled under the "note" event type:
- comments on a commit
- comments on an issue
- comments on a merge request
- comments on a code snippet
|
