Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Move it to Members::ApproveAccessRequestService.

Also, note that there was a double audit event log for access request
destruction.
Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

- Create MemberPresenter alongside with GroupMemberPresenter and ProjectMemberPresenter
- Make Member model Presentable
- Move action_member_permission from MembersHelper into the MemberPresenter
- Added rspec using double, separate specs for GroupMemberPresenter and ProjectMemberPresenter

Fixes #28004.
Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

The following optimizations were performed:

- Add new association to GroupMember and ProjectMember

  This new association will allow us to check if a user is a member of a
  Project or Group through a single query instead of two.

- Optimize retrieving of Members when adding multiple Users

since this is for user invites and the like.

One should really use a separate table instead of using polymorphic
associations.

See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/11168 for
more information.

Previously, only group masters could do this. However, project reporters can
manage project labels, so there doesn't seem to be any need to restrict group
labels further.

Also, save a query or two by getting a single GroupMember object to find out if
the user is a master or not.

Signed-off-by: NDmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: NDmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>

This reverts commit e00fb2bdc2090e9cabeb1eb35a2672a882cc96e9.

# Conflicts:
#	.rubocop.yml
#	.rubocop_todo.yml
#	lib/gitlab/ci/config/entry/global.rb
#	lib/gitlab/ci/config/entry/jobs.rb
#	spec/lib/gitlab/ci/config/entry/factory_spec.rb
#	spec/lib/gitlab/ci/config/entry/global_spec.rb
#	spec/lib/gitlab/ci/config/entry/job_spec.rb
#	spec/lib/gitlab/ci/status/build/factory_spec.rb
#	spec/lib/gitlab/incoming_email_spec.rb

This reverts commit cb10b725c8929b8b4460f89c9d96c773af39ba6b.

Signed-off-by: NDmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>

There were two cases that could be problematic:

1. Because sometimes AuthorizedProjectsWorker would be scheduled in a
   transaction it was possible for a job to run/complete before a
   COMMIT; resulting in it either producing an error, or producing no
   new data.

2. When scheduling jobs the code would not wait until completion. This
   could lead to a user creating a project and then immediately trying
   to push to it. Usually this will work fine, but given enough load it
   might take a few seconds before a user has access.

The first one is problematic, the second one is mostly just annoying
(but annoying enough to warrant a solution).

This commit changes two things to deal with this:

1. Sidekiq scheduling now takes places after a COMMIT, this is ensured
   by scheduling using Rails' after_commit hook instead of doing so in
   an arbitrary method.

2. When scheduling jobs the calling thread now waits for all jobs to
   complete.

Solution 2 requires tracking of job completions. Sidekiq provides a way
to find a job by its ID, but this involves scanning over the entire
queue; something that is very in-efficient for large queues. As such a
more efficient solution is necessary. There are two main Gems that can
do this in a more efficient manner:

* sidekiq-status
* sidekiq_status

No, this is not a joke. Both Gems do a similar thing (but slightly
different), and the only difference in their name is a dash vs an
underscore. Both Gems however provide far more than just checking if a
job has been completed, and both have their problems. sidekiq-status
does not appear to be actively maintained, with the last release being
in 2015. It also has some issues during testing as API calls are not
stubbed in any way. sidekiq_status on the other hand does not appear to
be very popular, and introduces a similar amount of code.

Because of this I opted to write a simple home grown solution. After
all, all we need is storing a job ID somewhere so we can efficiently
look it up; we don't need extra web UIs (as provided by sidekiq-status)
or complex APIs to update progress, etc.

This is where Gitlab::SidekiqStatus comes in handy. This namespace
contains some code used for tracking, removing, and looking up job IDs;
all without having to scan over an entire queue. Data is removed
explicitly, but also expires automatically just in case.

Using this API we can now schedule jobs in a fork-join like manner: we
schedule the jobs in Sidekiq, process them in parallel, then wait for
completion. By using Sidekiq we can leverage all the benefits such as
being able to scale across multiple cores and hosts, retrying failed
jobs, etc.

The one downside is that we need to make sure we can deal with
unexpected increases in job processing timings. To deal with this the
class Gitlab::JobWaiter (used for waiting for jobs to complete) will
only wait a number of seconds (30 by default). Once this timeout is
reached it will simply return.

For GitLab.com almost all AuthorizedProjectWorker jobs complete in
seconds, only very rarely do we spike to job timings of around a minute.
These in turn seem to be the result of external factors (e.g. deploys),
in which case a user is most likely not able to use the system anyway.

In short, this new solution should ensure that jobs are processed
properly and that in almost all cases a user has access to their
resources whenever they need to have access.

Closes #23150

Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Changes include:

- Ensure Member.add_user is not called directly when not necessary
- New GroupMember.add_users_to_group to have the same abstraction level as for Project
- Refactor Member.add_user to take a source instead of an array of members
- Fix Rubocop offenses
- Always use Project#add_user instead of project.team.add_user
- Factorize users addition as members in Member.add_users_to_source
- Make access_level a keyword argument in GroupMember.add_users_to_group and ProjectMember.add_users_to_projects
- Destroy any requester before adding them as a member
- Improve the way we handle access requesters in Member.add_user
  Instead of removing the requester and creating a new member,
  we now simply accepts their access request. This way, they will
  receive a "access request granted" email.
- Fix error that was previously silently ignored
- Stop raising when access level is invalid in Member, let Rails validation do their work
Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

An unapproved access request should not give access rights, and blocked users
should not be considered members of anything.

One visible outcome of this behaviour is that owners and masters of a group or
project may be blocked, yet still receive notification emails for access
requests. This commit prevents this from happening.