Trainee BE maintainer (GitLab) - Furkan Ayhan
Basic setup
- Read the code review page in the handbook and the code review guidelines.
- Understand how to become a maintainer
- Add yourself as a trainee maintainer on the team page.
- Ask your manager to set up a check in on this issue every six weeks or so.
Working towards becoming a maintainer
There is no checklist here, only guidelines. There is no specific timeline on this, but historically most backend trainee maintainers have become maintainers five to seven months after starting their training.
As part of your journey towards becoming a maintainer, you may find it useful to:
- Shadow a maintainer while they review an MR. This will allow you to get insight into the thought processes involved.
- Have a maintainer shadow you while you review an MR as if you were a maintainer . Ideally, this would be with a different maintainer to the above, so you can get different insights.
You are free to discuss your progress with your manager or any maintainer at any time. As in the list above, your manager should review this issue with you roughly every six weeks; this is useful to track your progress, and see if there are any changes you need to make to move forward.
It is up to you to ensure that you are getting enough MRs to review, and of varied types. All engineers are reviewers, so you should already be receiving regular reviews from Reviewer Roulette. You could also seek out more reviews from your team, or #backend Slack channels.
Your reviews should aim to cover maintainer responsibilities as well as reviewer responsibilities. Your approval means you think it is ready to merge.
After each MR is merged or closed, add a discussion to this issue using this template:
### (Merge request title): (Merge request URL)
During review:
- (List anything of note, or a quick summary. "I suggested/identified/noted...")
Post-review:
- (List anything of note, or a quick summary. "I missed..." or "Merged as-is")
(Maintainer who reviewed this merge request) Please add feedback, and compare
this review to the average maintainer review.
Note: Do not include reviews of security MRs because review feedback might reveal security issue details.
Code Review Pairing
Much like pair programming, pairing on code review is a great way to knowledge share and collaborate on merge request. This is a great activity for trainee maintainers to participate with maintainers for learning their process of code review.
A private code review session (unrecorded) involves one primary reviewer, and a shadow. If more than one shadow wishes to observe a private session, please consider obtaining consent from the merge request author.
A public code review session involves a primary reviewer and one or more shadows in a recorded session that is released publicly, for example to GitLab Unfiltered.
- If the merge request author is a GitLab team member, please consider obtaining consent from them.
- If the merge request author is a community contributor, you must obtain consent from them.
- Do not release reviews of security merge requests publicly.
When you're ready to make it official
When reviews have accumulated, you can confidently address the majority of the MR's assigned to you, and recent reviews consistently fulfill maintainer responsibilities, then you can propose yourself as a new maintainer for the relevant application.
Remember that even when you are a maintainer, you can still request help from other maintainers if you come across an MR that you feel is too complex or requires a second opinion.
- Create a merge request updating your team member entry using the template proposing yourself as a maintainer for the relevant application, assigned to your manager.
-
Keep reviewing, start merging
Designs
- Show closed items
Activity
-
Newest first Oldest first
-
Show all activity Show comments only Show history only
- Furkan Ayhan added trainee maintainer + 1 deleted label
added trainee maintainer + 1 deleted label
- Furkan Ayhan assigned to @furkanayhan
assigned to @furkanayhan
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Read the code review page in the handbook and the code review guidelines. as completed
marked the checklist item Read the code review page in the handbook and the code review guidelines. as completed
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Understand how to become a maintainer as completed
marked the checklist item Understand how to become a maintainer as completed
- Furkan Ayhan mentioned in merge request !61862 (merged)
mentioned in merge request !61862 (merged)
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Add yourself as a trainee maintainer on the team page. as completed
marked the checklist item Add yourself as a trainee maintainer on the team page. as completed
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Ask your manager to set up a check in on this issue every six weeks or so. as completed
marked the checklist item Ask your manager to set up a check in on this issue every six weeks or so. as completed
- Author Developer
cc @cheryl.li
Collapse replies - Maintainer
That's awesome you've created this @furkanayhan
- Author Developer
Add sorting to GraphQL Vulnerabilities API: gitlab-org/gitlab!40856 (merged)
During review:
- I identified some wrong texts.
- I suggested to change an existing parameter name.
- I suggested to add a comment about newly adding paremeter.,
- I suggested to remove not-anymore-used scope.
- I suggested to change a method name to make it consistent.
- I suggested to add more test cases.
- I identified an unused Module.
- I suggested to remove unused parameters.
- I noted a few things.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@engwan Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
Great review! Great job spotting those unused pieces of code
1
- Author Developer
Remove duplicate project pipelines methods: gitlab-org/gitlab!41101 (merged)
During review:
- I noted a small thing.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@shinya.maeda Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Capture errors raised for a batch when resetting CI minutes: gitlab-org/gitlab!41888 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested an idea about the usage of error tracking.
- Merged as-is
@reprazent Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
I did have a suggestion on the error reporting: gitlab-org/gitlab!41888 (comment 410760338)
We don't use errors in sentry for error rates on jobs, but if error rates would be elevated, we'd sometimes look there to see what's happening. So when something is reported twice, this could cause us to draw the wrong conclusions. It's better to keep sentry clean as well
1 - Author Developer
I probably missed adding it because it was actually merged as-is. However, that's a good suggestion
Just adding it in Post-review section. Thanks
Edited by Furkan Ayhan
- Author Developer
Add :none strategy for deduplicating Sidekiq jobs: gitlab-org/gitlab!42095 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@reprazent Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
This was a nice and easy one
. 1
- Author Developer
Drop unused project param from #initialize: gitlab-org/gitlab!42510 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@lulalala Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
1 - Author Developer
Fix inconsistencies between finding jobs by tokens: gitlab-org/gitlab!42828 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@stanhu Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies
- Author Developer
Include child pipeline builds in latest successful builds for ref/sha: gitlab-org/gitlab!29710 (merged)
During review:
- I started a conversation about naming in several places. Then we decided to create a follow-up issue.
- I made a small suggestion about adding a comment.
- I identified some unused code pieces.
Post-review:
- I missed a missing integration test.
- The maintainer asked an important question.
- I missed an improvement.
@shinya.maeda Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - Author Developer
Add projects_creating_incidents to usage ping: gitlab-org/gitlab!42934 (merged)
During review:
- I had one comment but it was not a right call.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested a better naming.
@lulalala Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Increase Vulnerabilities per seeded project to 30: gitlab-org/gitlab!43324 (merged)
During review:
- I had a small suggestion about labeling.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@rspeicher Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan Good call on the label, but the MR was simple enough that there wasn't really anything to further review.
1
- Author Developer
Remove
ci_pipeline_rewind_iid
feature flag: gitlab-org/gitlab!43551 (merged)During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@jameslopez Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Remove banner that suggests WedIDE gitlab-ci.yml: gitlab-org/gitlab!42815 (merged)
During review:
- I idendified a removed test piece that should not be removed.
- I started a conversation about removing an existing enum.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
good review
1
- Author Developer
Resolve "Cannot include downstream pipeline with
include:file
": gitlab-org/gitlab!43404 (merged)During review:
- I suggested new test cases and a documentation change.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan It was great that you spotted the doc changes and the missing test! The MR was in great shape when I reviewed
1
- Author Developer
Fix Web hook deletion not working when many hook logs are present: gitlab-org/gitlab!43464 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a few small issues:
- I identified a way to reduce a query.
Post-review:
- I missed a few clean code improvements about naming and usage:
- The maintainer caught the not-quite-right service return value.
- I missed a missing spec.
- I missed a redundant code.
- I missed a test improvement.
@splattael Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan I liked your review and your suggestions a lot
I missed a few clean code improvements about naming and usage:
I already confused
delete
anddestroy
during the initial review so I wanted to clarify.not-quite-right service return value
Services can (in my opinion "should") return a service response and I believe we should aim to handle (present to users or log) the returned responses. I think this is still part some technical debt we are carrying.
Speaking of technical debt. Since this MR introduced a new service to destroy hooks I've spotted one other location where
hook.destroy
was still used instead of this service by simply searching forhook.destroy
Overall, it was a good review, thank you
1
- Author Developer
Speed up CI retry build service specs: gitlab-org/gitlab!44249 (merged)
During review:
- I noticed a small test performance improvement
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@rymai Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Good performance suggestion, nothing else to add!
1
- Author Developer
Remove issue Incident feature flag: gitlab-org/gitlab!44438 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@splattael Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Rather tiny MR with straightforward changes. Nothing more to add
1
- Author Developer
Minor refactor to entity_leave_service.rb: gitlab-org/gitlab!44530 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@mkozono Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Not much to say about this one, there were no problems
1
- Author Developer
Remove unused scoped labels feature flag: gitlab-org/gitlab!44140 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to rename the helper method.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is (for backend)
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
Good suggestion on helper name!
1
- Author Developer
Add healthcheck to CE [RUN AS-IF-FOSS]: gitlab-org/gitlab!44770 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@stanhu Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Step 1/3: Add GraphQL query to fetch single release: gitlab-org/gitlab!44766 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is (for backend)
@igor.drozdov Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Always Refresh Merge Requests in Merge Train from the beginning: gitlab-org/gitlab!45232 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@DylanGriffith Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Nothing to add. The MR was in a good state.
1
- Author Developer
Implement deleted objects for expired artifacts: gitlab-org/gitlab!42242 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested using
private
keyword. - I suggested a test case.
- I noticed a redundant line.
- I suggested a small text change on a test.
- I noticed an empty test.
Post-review:
- The maintainer noticed the long timeout value.
- The maintainer suggested to handle also pipeline artifacts.
- I missed the return value of a method.
@reprazent Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - I suggested using
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan I think the MR was in a pretty good state when it got to me. Well done!
The return value of methods was important to make sure the "old" version works properly. It probably did, but we were counting on implicit truthy return values. It wasn't obvious after the refactor, but we need to make sure the old behaviour kept working.
1
- Author Developer
Update GitLab Runner Helm Chart to 0.22.0/13.5.0: gitlab-org/gitlab!45664 (merged)
During review:
- I had no comment.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@rspeicher Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
Nothing to really review here, for either of us. Not sure this should be included.
1
- Author Developer
Cleans up ci_jobs_finder_refactor ff code: gitlab-org/gitlab!45558 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a not-anymore-used method.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@jprovaznik Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan good review, I have nothing to add.
1
- Author Developer
Whats new - add pagination and infinite scroll: gitlab-org/gitlab!45101 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested creating a follow-up issue for moving the into a service.
- I suggested an early-return.
- I suggested using a
strong_memoize
. - I suggested a few small changes.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested creating a follow-up issue about caching keys.
- I missed handling incorrect values for the page parameter.
- The maintainer suggested to remove the redundant
X-Page
header. - The maintainer suggested a refactoring.
@a_akgun Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
Thanks @furkanayhan for the good review - the suggestions I made were usually optional and ended up in follow-ups.
1
- Author Developer
Support variables in rules:changes: gitlab-org/gitlab!45037 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested a better way to handle two different behaviors of methods. (introducing a new method instead of sending a flag parameter)
- The maintainer suggested using table-based RSpec syntax for a test case.
- I missed a few required test cases.
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan Overall your review was good
You were attentive to readability and test coverage.The maintainer suggested a better way to handle two different behaviors of methods. (introducing a new method instead of sending a flag parameter)
The previous version was missing an abstraction that was the key distinction between the 2 behaviors. My heuristic is to ensure behavior is represented explicitly via abstractions (e.g. new methods) without the need to dig into the implementation to understand it.
1
- Author Developer
[RUN AS-IF-FOSS] Add association between DeployKey and PushAccessLevel: gitlab-org/gitlab!47305 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to add the
private
keyword. - I also asked a few more questions just to understand.
Post-review:
- The maintainer has a note about export attributes.
- Merged as-is
@nick.thomas Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- I suggested to add the
Collapse replies - Contributor
Good review
. This MR was split out from another one I'm reviewing, so I was already over-familiar with the area 1
- Author Developer
Add GraphQL mutation to promote an issue to an epic: gitlab-org/gitlab!46143 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a small text change on a spec.
- I suggested a few(1, 2) conversions from
let
tolet_it_be
andbefore
tobefore_all
(3).
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested a redundant
::
. - The maintainer identified usage of the
private
keyword. - I missed a grammar fix.
- The maintainer pointed out that some tests in a spec can be redundant since we already covered them in other specs.
@lulalala Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies Thanks for the review. Yeah I think the
private
check is valuable inventory for reviewers.We also recently had a challenge to reduce test duration, that's why I questioned about the spec. I think that's a bit of the grey area so always check with the author though.
1
- Author Developer
Add app and audit event logs to PAT create and revoke services: gitlab-org/gitlab!45976 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a missing
private
keyword. - I noted a redundant attr reader.
- I identified a wrongly passed parameter. (also)
- I suggested a small change.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@engwan Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - I identified a missing
- Author Developer
Rollout ci_deleted_objects feature: gitlab-org/gitlab!46971 (merged)
During review:
- I noted that we should also change the value for "default" file.
Post-review:
- The maintainer noticed that we should also remove
ci_delete_objects_low_concurrency
.
@reprazent Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
This was a particularly weird feature flag removal MR. But overall, I don't think they're the most interesting in the context of trainee maintainer issues.
But in this case, nice catch on the cron config
. 1 1
- Author Developer
Execute HTTP calls to Kubernetes in Sidekiq Worker Job: gitlab-org/gitlab!47065 (merged)
During review:
- I just had a small note about calling
validate
method. It turned out we didn't need it but added a comment to explain why.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@DylanGriffith Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - I just had a small note about calling
- Author Developer
Create Issues::BuildFromVulnerabilityService based off of Issues::BuildService: gitlab-org/gitlab!47510 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a redundant code.
- I noted about no-need a changelog.
- Litte suggestions of spec textings.
Post-review:
- I missed some code improvements (there are lots of them, but here are some):
- The maintainer suggested usage of
I18n
. - I missed a possible spec performance improvement.
- The maintainer noticed a better context/place for a test case.
@dbalexandre Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - Author Developer
Adds manual bridge support to public API: gitlab-org/gitlab!50634 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a code improvement.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@igor.drozdov Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - Author Developer
[DevOps Adoption] Daily updates - part 2: gitlab-org/gitlab!50416 (merged)
During review:
- I have only a small suggestion.
- Other than that, I only asked some questions...
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan all good. The change was pretty straightforward though. But +1 on asking questions to better understand the code.
1
- Author Developer
Allow removing iterations in Issues::Updateservice: gitlab-org/gitlab!51179 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan good review,
from me 1
- Author Developer
Add !reference to the CI syntax to merge YAML arrays: gitlab-org/gitlab!52104 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a test case.
- I suggested a small nice-to-have refactoring.
- I suggested renaming an attribute.
- I suggested that we should pass
permitted_classes
instead of having inline. It also helped us to check FF. - I noted that it might be better if there were some inline comments about tag/style... data.
- I suggested a test case.
- I suggested to move
!flatten
into another MR.
Post-review:
- The maintainer noted a coupling and it is actually resolved by other suggestion (extracting the logic into its own class).
- The maintainer noted a missing class comment.
- The maintainer noted that there needed to be
NotImplementedError
methods in the base class. - I missed an unused method.
- The maintainer also suggested to move
!flatten
into another MR. - The maintainer suggested a good lazy load.
- The maintainer suggested using
override
.
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan main improvements coming from maintainer review were:
- extraction of class
-
remove
!flatten
entirely (by always flattening arrays)
For the rest your review was great!
1
- Author Developer
Add mergedYaml to CiConfigResolver: gitlab-org/gitlab!53081 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@rspeicher Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - Author Developer
Change nesting level for CI script keyword: gitlab-org/gitlab!53737 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a redundant inheritance.
- I suggested a small renaming.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested an explicit call of the proc.
- The maintainer suggested a method renaming.
- I missed that the validator should have validated strings but it actually just used to validate arrays.
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan gitlab-org/gitlab!53737 (comment 509242767) was probably the main concern in the MR. Good catch in identifying a redundant inheritance!
1
- Author Developer
Allow to cherry pick into different project: gitlab-org/gitlab!56121 (merged)
During review:
- I added a few small comments about the feature flag (1, 2)
- I suggested a small refactoring.
- I suggested to use
default_enabled: :yaml
for the feature flag check. - I suggested a test refactoring.
- I suggested a test case.
- I noted a permission check.
Post-review:
- The maintainer also noted the permission check.
- The maintainer suggested to use something else than the regular
find_by_id
for finding the target project. ThenMergeRequestTargetProjectFinder
was decided.
@nick.thomas Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Disable pipeline schedules when a user is blocked: gitlab-org/gitlab!56513 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a test case.
Post-review:
- missed a test case texting.
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Simple review. Good suggestion of the test case.
1
- Author Developer
Restrict external pipeline validation to a single not acceptable code: gitlab-org/gitlab!56856 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a redundant changelog.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested to define constants.
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Simple review. Nothing to add.
1
- Author Developer
Remove time param in Gitlab::UsageDataCounters::EpicActivityUniqueCounter: gitlab-org/gitlab!57114 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to remove all related parameter instead of just a single place, so that we won't have redundant conditions in tests.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is.
@engwan Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Move pipeline processing async: gitlab-org/gitlab!57589 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a test case.
Post-review:
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Missing specs for workers idempotency is something I sometimes see being forgotten. Good review for the rest
1
- Author Developer
Adjust stackprof default sampling intervals: gitlab-org/gitlab!59630 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a redundant comment line.
- I suggested that we had already that mechanism so we don't need that change.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is.
@stanhu Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Add targetType to DastSiteProfileUpdate mutation: gitlab-org/gitlab!59715 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested a test refactoring.
- I suggested a test text change and a redundant usage of
aggregate_failures
. - I suggested a test refactoring.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is.
@rspeicher Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan Always nice to see equal attention paid to the tests.
1
- Author Developer
Store slice multiplier and max slices running for reindexing in database: gitlab-org/gitlab!60861 (merged)
During review:
- I asked a question about handling the default values. Then it's decided to use default values on the DB side.
- I suggested a small test clarification.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is other than the DB changes.
@DylanGriffith Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Nothing to add. The MR was in a good condition when I arrived.
1
- Author Developer
Expire Ci::Minutes::CachedQuota when minutes limits are updated: gitlab-org/gitlab!60739 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
@smcgivern Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
- Author Developer
Refactor project-level protected environments for group-level: gitlab-org/gitlab!58633 (merged)
During review:
- I noted the change about the access check.
- I suggested a test case of the missing user.
- I suggested removing a duplication. Then the structure was changed with a better implementation from the author.
- I identified these wrong test setups:
- I noted that the test is not as we expected without calling the query.
- I suggested a follow-up MR for the test refactoring.
- I identified some redundant codes.
- I identified these missed test setups:
- I suggested to use
create!
instead ofcreate
as a part ofRails/SaveBang
refactoring. - I suggested to add a comment about
jailbreak
.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is with a small refactoring suggestion from the maintainer.
@DylanGriffith Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Nothing to add. Looks like your review suggested a bunch of great improvements.
1
- Author Developer
Add job-level keyword for DAST configuration: gitlab-org/gitlab!63370 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to move EE related keys to EE.
- Another one: gitlab-org/gitlab!63370 (comment 596477585)
- I noted getting approval from the product side.
- (I also made some suggestions in the previous closed MR: gitlab-org/gitlab!62986 (closed))
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@engwan Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - I suggested to move EE related keys to EE.
- Author Developer
Add 2 new sort options to runner API: CREATED_ASC and CONTACTED_DESC: gitlab-org/gitlab!62310 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested another alternative that we already use in our codebase.
- I suggested removing a context in tests.
Post-review:
- I missed that the default sort value was not in the allowed list.
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan good review, thanks.
1
- Author Developer
Add project setting to toggle job token scope: gitlab-org/gitlab!63446 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to change the default column for new projects. It's decided to do that in a follow-up.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@shinya.maeda Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Drop builds with
ci_quota_exceeded
failure reason: gitlab-org/gitlab!63542 (merged)During review:
- I suggested a change to make variable to reflect its name.
- I noted the original scenario.
- I suggested to add a note about the removal.
- I suggested a small test refactoring.
- I suggested to break down methods.
- I have some other comments but they are irrelevant.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@fabiopitino Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan Great review
1
- Author Developer
Return 0 for projectCount when no associated projects are found: gitlab-org/gitlab!65252 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to move the logic into SQL instead of doing it on the Rails side.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@abrandl Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
1 - Author Developer
Improve the performance of project/users API: gitlab-org/gitlab!64528 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@shinya.maeda Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Nice review
1
- Author Developer
Deliver DAST on-demand CI variables to builds: gitlab-org/gitlab!63382 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to create a follow-up issue about the empty error message.
- I suggested a change for the feature flag usage.
- I noted that we may use
BaseService
as a parent class. Then, it turned out thatBaseProjectService
was better. - I suggested renaming a few test variables.
- I identified a redundant test case.
- I identified a redundant test line.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@engwan Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Use non-predefined variables inside CI include blocks: gitlab-org/gitlab!66852 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested naming changes for tests.
- I noted that the priority of variables is important and suggested a better syntax with using
Gitlab::Ci::Variables::Collection
. - I suggested to add a comment about a parameter.
- I suggested to add a test about variable priority.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested to add a comment about variables order.
@dbalexandre Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Add Ci::Pipeline source for DAST site validation: gitlab-org/gitlab!66991 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a missing comment.
- I firstly suggested a syntax, then noted that we didn't need it at all.
- I suggested a test improvement.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@.luke Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
This was a really good review! Although the MR was small, you added a lot of value to it. Your thoroughness in looking at the code while suggesting improvements led you to notice that we could remove a method gitlab-org/gitlab!66991 (comment 638346931). This is something that we'd expect from a maintainer. Nice work!
1
- Author Developer
Add support for CI_COMMIT_REF_NAME variable in includes: gitlab-org/gitlab!67902 (merged)
During review:
- I identified wrong order of variables.
- I suggested to change the method name for future references.
- I suggested a small text change.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
@furkanayhan good review, thanks!
1
- Author Developer
Fix stage_dependent_jobs: gitlab-org/gitlab!67337 (merged)
During review:
- I started a discussion about the general approach.
- I suggested adding a test case and changing the commit message.
- I suggested a test improvement.
- I suggested a test improvement.
Post-review:
- The maintainer shared their thoughts on that general discussion and question with other example cases.
@grzesiek Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Fix bug validating EE project features: gitlab-org/gitlab!68523 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to moving private methods under the
private
keyword.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@mwoolf Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
1 - I suggested to moving private methods under the
- Author Developer
Drop checks whether a squash is in progress: gitlab-org/gitlab!68647 (merged)
During review:
- I identified a non-removed code piece.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@Andysoiron Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
That was a good review @furkanayhan! It's easy to miss peaces of code that are unused after the change because this doesn't show up in the diff.
1
- Author Developer
Add personalization questions to New Group page: gitlab-org/gitlab!67249 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested an out-of-scope suggestion, but it's not important.
- I suggested a one-liner.
- I suggested a test case.
- I noted about a missing test case.
Post-review:
- There are some maintainer comments but Merged as-is.
@mkaeppler Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Great review across the board! I liked your suggestion about pushing some logic down from the controller to the service level as well. You also helped to improve test coverage and code style.
This was
1
- Author Developer
Enable caching of MergeToRefService responses: gitlab-org/gitlab!69019 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dzaporozhets Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
Not much for feedback since MR was quite small and simple. Still
1
- Author Developer
Geo: Replicate wiki and design HEAD ref if needed: gitlab-org/gitlab!68324 (merged)
During review:
- I had some comments/questions but I am not sure if they are relevant here. (Also not sure if I should add this here)
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dgruzd Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Remove redundant specs about CI minutes notifications: gitlab-org/gitlab!69210 (merged)
During review:
- I noted about a missing test case.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dstull Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
@furkanayhan thank you for pointing out the gap in test coverage. When I came to the MR, I didn't find anything else that needed attention and felt good that the test area was analyzed well.
1
- Author Developer
Log scheduled pipeline creation failure: gitlab-org/gitlab!70601 (merged)
During review:
- On the code side, I thought everything was smooth.
- I just noted a few things about labels, changelog.
- Also asked a question about the scalability of that.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested the usage of an existing metadata logging method of workers.
- I missed a typo.
@reprazent Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review
Collapse replies - Developer
The maintainer suggested the usage of an existing metadata logging method of workers.
I don't think that this would have made a very big difference when running. Just makes things slightly easier to see for people that were not involved in adding logs.
Otherwise, the MR was in a good place already, we didn't have a lot of work
.Edited by Bob Van Landuyt 1
- Author Developer
Add GitLab DSN to error tracking UI: gitlab-org/gitlab!70791 (merged)
During review:
- I noted a typo in tests.
- I suggested a usage of
strong_memoize
. - I suggested moving some methods under the
private
keyword.- Because of that, we removed a test.
- I also asked a few questions but not relevant.
Post-review:
@mayra-cabrera Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Enable FF "tags_finder_gitaly" by default: gitlab-org/gitlab!71743 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@DylanGriffith Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Edited by Furkan Ayhan - Author Developer
Enable FF "reference_cache_memoization" by default: gitlab-org/gitlab!71731 (merged)
During review:
- I noted to add proper labels and fix the changelog.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@rymai Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
1 - Author Developer
Remove project authorizations API FF: gitlab-org/gitlab!71638 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@nick.thomas Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Enable CI minutes update to run idempotently: gitlab-org/gitlab!69994 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- The maintainer made a good point about parameter ordering.
- Merged as-is
@smcgivern Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
Thanks @furkanayhan, the logging point was really valuable. That sort of change is always helpful because it makes the logging more useful in Kibana.
1
- Author Developer
Adding websocket origins to connect-src to support Safari: gitlab-org/gitlab!70932 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to assign "magic" numbers into a variable.
Post-review:
- The maintainer asked a question about subdirectory GL instanced.
- The security reviewer suggested to use only either
ws
orwss
.
@dbalexandre Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Furkan Ayhan changed the description
Compare with previous version changed the description
- Author Developer
Migration testing for down database migrations: gitlab-org/gitlab!71111 (merged)
During review:
- I noted that the default value of a parameter may not be necessary.
- I noted that we need to put TODOs in a follow-up issue.
- I suggested a one-liner.
- I identified that we don't check the persistent of a variable.
- I suggested to separate public and private methods.
- I identified a redundant test piece.
- I suggested a few small test improvements (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ).
Post-review:
- The database reviewer suggested memoization of a method.
- The database reviewer suggested a test case.
- The backend maintainer suggested the same approach of the other spec file for the declaration of a test variable.
- The backend maintainer identified the redundant use of
@
. - The database maintainer suggested to add empty lines between test blocks.
@vyaklushin Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Thank you for the great review! I've rechecked your comments and agree with your suggestions.
1
- Author Developer
Add Corpus model: gitlab-org/gitlab!71704 (merged)
During review:
- I identified that an optional relation is not marked as optional in the model.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@mayra-cabrera Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Add OneTrust installation script to non-product pages: gitlab-org/gitlab!71243 (merged)
During review:
- I noted about labels and changelogs.
- I identified the wrong link in the FF YAML file.
- I noted that a security review was needed.
Post-review:
- I missed a duplicate code that can be extracted and reused.
- The maintainer suggested to remove the redundant
nil
parameter. - The maintainer pointed out that a method may not be available in some classes. Also, asked for a test case for it.
- I should have mentioned about FF behavior in tests but left it as it is. The maintainer suggested to remove redundant FF enablement in tests.
- The maintainer suggested a request spec.
@stanhu Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies @furkanayhan I think this merge request needed a bit more attention. While it probably would have worked fine without any of my comments, anything that touches logins should be reviewed with an extra layer of caution. I think having that request spec was important here.
1 1
- Author Developer
Align front/backend Draft MR regexes: gitlab-org/gitlab!71839 (merged)
During review:
- I noted about changelog and labels. Also asked about a possible breaking change.
- I suggested a small test refactoring.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested writing comments next to regexpes.
- The maintainer suggested to use
Parameterized::TableSyntax
.
@alexkalderimis Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Contributor
Regular Expressions, as a mini embedded language, need careful attention to remain readable and maintainable. Use of
/x
syntax (extended regexes) and judicious comments is a good way to do this (as is the use of table-syntax, where examples are repeated).The code was well-reviewed, and ready for merge - sometimes paying attention to future readers/maintainers is a good idea too.
1 2
- Author Developer
Fix cross-DB query in EnvironmentStatus: gitlab-org/gitlab!71894 (merged)
During review:
- I noted that the MR did not require a changelog also did require a database review.
- I asked the reason behind the limit, then suggested to add this as a comment there.
- I suggested test refactorings.
Post-review:
- The maintainer suggested a more clear comment.
- The maintainer suggested to use state machine methods instead of updating manually in tests.
- The maintainer suggested to remove a redundant assignment.
- The database maintainer also suggested adding a feature flag.
@shinya.maeda Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Maintainer
Great review
Keep it up! 1
- Author Developer
Fixes rendering duplicate data-src attribute: gitlab-org/gitlab!72135 (merged)
During review:
- I suggested to add a merge-request-type label.
- I asked some questions to understand.
- I identified a redundant parameter.
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@dskim_gitlab Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
- Author Developer
Open Buy Minutes in new window if targeting CDot: gitlab-org/gitlab!72578 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@ck3g Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
There was good suggestions from you. I had nothing else to add.
1
- Author Developer
Fix issues with frame-src CSP directive: gitlab-org/gitlab!72830 (merged)
During review:
Post-review:
- Merged as-is
@alexpooley Please add feedback, and compare this review to the average maintainer review.
Collapse replies - Developer
Good suggestions and good job keeping the MR on track.
1
- Furkan Ayhan mentioned in merge request !93293 (merged)
mentioned in merge request !93293 (merged)
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Create a merge request updating your team member entry using the template proposing yourself as a maintainer for the relevant application, assigned to your manager. as completed
marked the checklist item Create a merge request updating your team member entry using the template proposing yourself as a maintainer for the relevant application, assigned to your manager. as completed
- Furkan Ayhan marked the checklist item Keep reviewing, start merging
as completedmarked the checklist item Keep reviewing, start merging
as completed - Author Developer
Closing
!93293 (merged) - Furkan Ayhan closed
closed
- Ryan Wells (Parental Leave - returning May 26) added backend label and removed 1 deleted label
added backend label and removed 1 deleted label