Exclude archived projects in search results by default
What does this MR do and why?
Users have been requesting to exclude archived projects from the search results for the project scope.
How
- Add a filter
include_archived
- added to CE since both basic and advanced search will use it - Exclude archived projects if the filter is not added as a parameter
- Include archived projects if the filter is added as a parameter
- Basic search uses the
archived
field on projects - Advanced search searches use the
archived
field already present in Elasticsearch
Next steps
- Document the default behaviour and how to include archived projects using the parameter
- Frontend: [Projects] Add a visual toggle for including ar... (#413237 - closed)
- API parity: Update projects search API to filter by archive... (#413239)
Screenshots or screen recordings
Type | Level | Before | After | include_archived=true |
---|---|---|---|---|
Basic | Global | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Basic | Group | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Advanced | Global | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Advanced | Group | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
How to set up and validate locally
- Do a basic search (add
&basic_search=true
to the url) for an existing project and verify that the project is returned in search results- Without selecting a group/project
- With a group selected
- Archive the project
- Do the same basic searches and verify that the project is not returned
- Unarchive the project
- Do an advanced search (make sure Elasticsearch is setup) for the project and verify that the project is returned
- Without selecting a group/project
- With a group selected
- Archive the project
- Do the same advanced searches and verify that the project is not returned
MR acceptance checklist
This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
-
I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.
Related to #18262 (closed)
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %16.1
assigned to @maddievn
Hey @maddievn, please use devopscreate devopsmanage as Create [DEPRECATED] Manage [DEPRECATED] has been deprecated. This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
added devopsmanage label and removed Create [DEPRECATED] Manage [DEPRECATED] devopsdata stores labels
added devopsdata stores label and removed devopsmanage label
- A deleted user
added backend label
- Resolved by Madelein van Niekerk
- Resolved by Madelein van Niekerk
- Resolved by Madelein van Niekerk
- Resolved by Madelein van Niekerk
4 Warnings This MR changes code in ee/
, but its Changelog commit is missing theEE: true
trailer. Consider adding it to your Changelog commits.8c0ef053: The commit subject must contain at least 3 words. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. c64de404: The commit body should not contain more than 72 characters per line. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. Please add a merge request subtype to this merge request. 1 Message This merge request adds or changes documentation files. A review from the Technical Writing team before you merge is recommended. Reviews can happen after you merge. Documentation review
The following files require a review from a technical writer:
-
doc/user/search/index.md
(Link to current live version)
The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:
-
Metadata for the
*.md
files that you've changed. The first few lines of each*.md
file identify the stage and group most closely associated with your docs change. - The Technical Writer assigned for that stage and group.
- Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.
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 Mohamed Hamda (
@mhamda
) (UTC+2, same timezone as@maddievn
)Mark Chao (
@lulalala
) (UTC+8, 6 hours ahead of@maddievn
)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-
mentioned in issue #413237 (closed)
mentioned in issue #413239
marked the checklist item I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR. as completed
Allure report
allure-report-publisher
generated test report!e2e-test-on-gdk:
test report for 92d2df4bexpand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Create | 8 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 | ✅ | | Govern | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Manage | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ✅ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | ❗ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Plan | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 21 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 23 | ❗ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
- Resolved by Dmitry Gruzd
Hey @sdungarwal
would you be able to do the first review of this MR which excludes archived projects and assign to@dgruzd
if you're happy?
requested review from @sdungarwal
Hi @ashrafkhamis, I want to indicate that archived projects are no longer being included by default for project searches but that there is a way to have them included if a parameter is passed. Do you have an idea of where the best would be to put this in documentation?
- Resolved by Dmitry Gruzd
Hi @maddievn
I suspect this is just one or two sentences. I'd add the information to https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/search/#search-for-projects-by-full-path.
- A deleted user
added documentation label
@sdungarwal
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.
For more info, please refer to the following links:
added pipeline:mr-approved label
requested review from @dgruzd
removed review request for @dgruzd
requested review from @dgruzd
- Resolved by Madelein van Niekerk
removed review request for @sdungarwal
enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for aaa736e6 succeeds
mentioned in commit 875edd03
added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin dev label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label
mentioned in merge request !122332 (merged)
added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label
added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label
mentioned in issue #414900 (closed)
added releasedcandidate label
mentioned in merge request kubitus-project/kubitus-installer!2224 (merged)
mentioned in work item #414903 (closed)
mentioned in issue #416998 (closed)
mentioned in issue #421464 (closed)