add docs and tests - add additional validation
allow move without content
updated response

Currently when a user performs an update of a file through the UI  and there
has already been a change committed to the file the previous commits will be
overwritten without a check to see if the file has been changed.

This commit uses the last commit sha at the time the user starts editing the
file and compares it with the current sha of the file being edited to ensure
they are the same before committing the file. If the shas do not match we
throw an exception preventing the commit from the commit from occurring.

Fixes #5857

This reverts commit 530f5158.

See !4892.
Signed-off-by: NRémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

This reverts commit 9ca633eb, reversing
changes made to fb229bbf.

1. Don't use case statements for dispatch anymore. This leads to a lot
   of duplication, and makes the logic harder to follow.

2. Remove duplicated logic.

    - For example, the `can_push_to_branch?` exists, but we also have a
      different way of checking the same condition within `change_access_check`.

    - This kind of duplication is removed, and the `can_push_to_branch?`
      method is used in both places.

3. Move checks returning true/false to `UserAccess`.

    - All public methods in `GitAccess` now return an instance of
      `GitAccessStatus`. Previously, some methods would return
      true/false as well, which was confusing.

    - It makes sense for these kinds of checks to be at the level of a
      user, so the `UserAccess` class was repurposed for this. The prior
      `UserAccess.allowed?` classmethod is converted into an instance
      method.

    - All external uses of these checks have been migrated to use the
      `UserAccess` class

4. Move the "change_access_check" into a separate class.

    - Create the `GitAccess::ChangeAccessCheck` class to run these
      checks, which are quite substantial.

    - `ChangeAccessCheck` returns an instance of `GitAccessStatus` as
      well.

5. Break out the boolean logic in `ChangeAccessCheck` into `if/else`
   chains - this seems more readable.

6. I can understand that this might look like overkill for !4892, but I
   think this is a good opportunity to clean it up.

    - http://martinfowler.com/bliki/OpportunisticRefactoring.html