1. 16 Dec, 2016 1 commit
    • Timothy Andrew's avatar
      Accept environment variables from the `pre-receive` script. · f82d549d
      Timothy Andrew authored
      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
         `/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.
  2. 13 Sep, 2016 1 commit
    • Paco Guzman's avatar
      Avoid protected branches checks when verifying access without branch name · 08871cc3
      Paco Guzman authored
      GitlabShell verify access sending ‘_any’ as the changes made on the git command, in those cases Gitlab::Checks::ChangeAccess won’t receive a branch_name so we don’t need to check for access to the 
      protected branches on that repository. So we avoid some git operations in case the are not cached (empty_repo?) and some database lookups to get protected branches.
      These request is happening in every push.
  3. 12 Aug, 2016 1 commit
  4. 11 Aug, 2016 1 commit
    • Scott Le's avatar
      api for generating new merge request · 6109daf4
      Scott Le authored
      DRY code + fix rubocop
      Add more test cases
      Append to changelog
      DRY changes list
      find_url service for merge_requests
      use GET for getting merge request links
      remove files
      rename to get_url_service
      reduce loop
      add test case for cross project
      refactor tiny thing
      update changelog
  5. 18 Jul, 2016 1 commit
  6. 13 Jul, 2016 4 commits
    • Robert Speicher's avatar
      Revert "Merge branch '18193-developers-can-merge' into 'master' · 530f5158
      Robert Speicher authored
      This reverts commit 9ca633eb, reversing
      changes made to fb229bbf.
    • Timothy Andrew's avatar
      Implement last round of review comments from !4892. · bb81f2af
      Timothy Andrew authored
      1. Fix typos, minor styling errors.
      2. Use single quotes rather than double quotes in `user_access_spec`.
      3. Test formatting.
    • Timothy Andrew's avatar
      Move all "checks" under `GitLab::Checks`. · ea9e8f46
      Timothy Andrew authored
      - gitlab-org/gitlab-ce!4892 (comment 12892160)
      - This is more consistent.
    • Timothy Andrew's avatar
      Refactor `Gitlab::GitAccess` · 60245bbe
      Timothy Andrew authored
      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
          - 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
      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