Refactors Usage Quotas feature specs to be located under one folder

added grouputilization maintenancerefactor labels

added devopsfulfillment sectionfulfillment labels

added 764 commits

e4c86ead...ef231464 - 761 commits from branch master
687e5cd2 - Moves usage quotas feature specs to dedicated folder
fc1a2b16 - Fixes formatting according to Rubocop
7063c58c - Fixes naming of contexts according to Rubocop

	1 Warning
	This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	Rajendra Kadam (`@rkadam3`) (UTC+5.5, 3.5 hours ahead of `@kpalchyk`)	Vasilii Iakliushin (`@vyaklushin`) (UTC+1, 1 hour behind `@kpalchyk`)
test for `spec/features/*`	Dan Davison (`@ddavison`) (UTC-4, 6 hours behind `@kpalchyk`)	Maintainer review is optional for test for `spec/features/*`

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

@ebralitis , @jagood , would you review this MR, please?

This MR is a first step in reorganising the Usage Quotas features specs. It is a follow-up on our discussion in !100933 (comment 1141395569), where we agreed to split that MR into smaller ones.

Here I move the spec files, apply Rubocop fixes and rename contexts.

LGTM

@kpalchyk Nice, I think this is a really good self-contained, iterative MR. LGTM!

I think you can probably also delete the old files from the rubocop todo's?

$ ggrep -R 'features.*seat_usage' .rubocop_todo      
.rubocop_todo/rspec/context_wording.yml:    - 'ee/spec/features/groups/seat_usage/seat_usage_spec.rb'
$ ggrep -R 'features/groups/usage_quotas' .rubocop_todo
.rubocop_todo/layout/line_length.yml:    - 'ee/spec/features/groups/usage_quotas_spec.rb'
.rubocop_todo/rspec/context_wording.yml:    - 'ee/spec/features/groups/usage_quotas_spec.rb'
.rubocop_todo/rspec/empty_line_after_hook.yml:    - 'ee/spec/features/groups/usage_quotas_spec.rb'
$

You'll find .rubocop_todo/ in your $GDK_ROOT/gitlab directory. If you didn't already know that, I just realized it may not be perfectly clear from the above.

@kpalchyk I think I would delete those lines from the rubocop todos before you go to a maintainer, but otherwise this LGTM so I'm approving.

Let me know if you want me to have a look at anything else.

The pipeline also seems to be stuck or taking a very long time? But I imagine you can get a green build.

Note to the maintainer: I think this will be ready to merge after the old files are removed from the rubocop todos. Otherwise, it looks ready to merge - it makes a small change to some specs just to better organize them and it fixes some rubocop violations along the way.

Traintainer issue: gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com#13344 (comment 1158148590)

You'll find .rubocop_todo/ in your $GDK_ROOT/gitlab directory. If you didn't already know that, I just realized it may not be perfectly clear from the above.

Thanks for giving additional context and for constructing the greps, @jagood

These rubocop todos are new for me

I previously thought that we only run rubocop on changed files

Applied the cleanup in 2215f3cd

@vyaklushin, could you maintainer-review this, please?

Nice refactoring! LGTM

Awesome, thanks for the review!

I previously thought that we only run rubocop on changed files

@kpalchyk I'm not totally sure what you mean by this. I'm actually not 100% sure how we run rubocop.

In CI, I'm pretty sure we run it on all the files.

Locally, when you're developing, I think it depends. I run it against only the files I've changed. I do that somewhat manually, but I think there's a lefthook script or something that plugs into git if you want to use that.

These rubocop todos are new for me

The rubocop todos are files that we skip. It's a "todo" in the sense that "we need to fix this file - it has a lot of rubocop errors, and we know that, so don't run rubocop on this file right now. We'll fix it later."

So for instance, 'ee/spec/features/groups/usage_quotas_spec.rb' was in .rubocop_todo/layout/line_length.yml because it had a lot of line length violations, so we were skipping running that cop on it. (We actually run the other cops - each todo skips only a specific cop.) Since you've renamed the file and fixed the rubocop errors that it had, we can remove 'ee/spec/features/groups/usage_quotas_spec.rb' from the todo file - that file no longer exists. We could probably just leave it there too, I bet it does no harm, but I think it's better to clean it up, so thanks for doing that!