1. 07 2月, 2017 2 次提交
  2. 28 1月, 2017 2 次提交
  3. 14 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  4. 11 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  5. 04 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  6. 03 1月, 2017 1 次提交
  7. 30 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  8. 28 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  9. 26 12月, 2016 1 次提交
    • S
      Use raw_diffs to calculate MR files changed · ed6900ca
      Sean McGivern 提交于
      We don't need to create the intermediate FileCollection object with its
      associated highlighting in order to count how many files changed. Both
      the compare object and the MR diff object have a raw_diffs method that
      is perfectly fine for this case.
      ed6900ca
  10. 19 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  11. 16 12月, 2016 10 次提交
  12. 15 12月, 2016 1 次提交
    • D
      Merge branch 'jej-note-search-uses-finder' into 'security' · 12db4cc0
      Douwe Maan 提交于
      Fix missing Note access checks in by moving Note#search to updated NoteFinder
      
      Split from !2024 to partially solve https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23867
      
      ## Which fixes are in this MR?
      
       - Potentially untested  
      💣 - No test coverage  
      🚥 - Test coverage of some sort exists (a test failed when error raised)  
      🚦 - Test coverage of return value (a test failed when nil used)  
       - Permissions check tested
      
      ### Note lookup without access check
      
      - [x]  app/finders/notes_finder.rb:13 :download_code check
      - [x]  app/finders/notes_finder.rb:19 `SnippetsFinder`
      - [x]  app/models/note.rb:121 [`Issue#visible_to_user`]
      - [x]  lib/gitlab/project_search_results.rb:113
        - This is the only use of `app/models/note.rb:121` above, but importantly has no access checks at all. This means it leaks MR comments and snippets when those features are `team-only` in addition to the issue comments which would be fixed by `app/models/note.rb:121`.
        - It is only called from SearchController where `can?(current_user, :download_code, @project)` is checked, so commit comments are not leaked.
      
      ### Previous discussions
      - [x] https://dev.gitlab.org/gitlab/gitlabhq/merge_requests/2024/diffs#b915c5267a63628b0bafd23d37792ae73ceae272_13_13 `: download_code` check on commit
      - [x] https://dev.gitlab.org/gitlab/gitlabhq/merge_requests/2024/diffs#b915c5267a63628b0bafd23d37792ae73ceae272_19_19 `SnippetsFinder` should be used
        - `SnippetsFinder` should check if the snippets feature is enabled -> https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/25223
      
      ###  Acceptance criteria met?
      - [x] Tests added for new code
      - [x] TODO comments removed
      - [x] Squashed and removed skipped tests
      - [x] Changelog entry
      - [ ] State Gitlab versions affected and issue severity in description
      - [ ] Create technical debt issue for NotesFinder.
        - Either split into `NotesFinder::ForTarget` and `NotesFinder::Search` or consider object per notable type such as `NotesFinder::OnIssue`. For the first option could create `NotesFinder::Base` which is either inherited from or which can be included in the other two.
        - Avoid case statement anti-pattern in this finder with use of `NotesFinder::OnCommit` etc. Consider something on the finder for this? `Model.finder(user, project)`
        - Move `inc_author` to the controller, and implement `related_notes` to replace `non_diff_notes`/`mr_and_commit_notes`
      
      See merge request !2035
      12db4cc0
  13. 09 12月, 2016 2 次提交
  14. 06 12月, 2016 1 次提交
    • B
      Feature: delegate all open discussions to Issue · 1123057a
      Bob Van Landuyt 提交于
      When a merge request can only be merged when all discussions are
      resolved. This feature allows to easily delegate those discussions to a
      new issue, while marking them as resolved in the merge request.
      
      The user is presented with a new issue, prepared with mentions of all
      unresolved discussions, including the first unresolved note of the
      discussion, time and link to the note.
      
      When the issue is created, the discussions in the merge request will get
      a system note directing the user to the newly created issue.
      1123057a
  15. 03 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  16. 01 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  17. 29 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  18. 28 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  19. 23 11月, 2016 2 次提交
    • Y
      Remove event caching code · 5371da34
      Yorick Peterse 提交于
      Flushing the events cache worked by updating a recent number of rows in
      the "events" table. This has the result that on PostgreSQL a lot of dead
      tuples are produced on a regular basis. This in turn means that
      PostgreSQL will spend considerable amounts of time vacuuming this table.
      This in turn can lead to an increase of database load.
      
      For GitLab.com we measured the impact of not using events caching and
      found no measurable increase in response timings. Meanwhile not flushing
      the events cache lead to the "events" table having no more dead tuples
      as now rows are only inserted into this table.
      
      As a result of this we are hereby removing events caching as it does not
      appear to help and only increases database load.
      
      For more information see the following comment:
      https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/6578#note_18864037
      5371da34
    • D
      f2a0c6f6
  20. 21 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  21. 17 11月, 2016 2 次提交
  22. 09 11月, 2016 1 次提交
  23. 04 11月, 2016 2 次提交
  24. 29 10月, 2016 1 次提交
  25. 25 10月, 2016 1 次提交