Refactor usage of .gitlab-ci.yml as the default CI Config

What does this MR do and why?

Using .gitlab-ci.yml as the default CI Config is distributed across the codebase. In this MR, we are simplifying it for further improvements.

As a part of #26169. Next step: !134121 (closed).

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.

changed milestone to %16.6

added Category:Pipeline Composition auto updated backend backend-weight3 candidate16.5 devopsverify grouppipeline authoring maintenancerefactor missed:16.5 pipeline pipeline processing potential proposal sectionci typefeature workflowin dev labels

assigned to @furkanayhan

added typemaintenance label and removed typefeature label

marked the checklist item I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR. as completed

removed potential proposal label

removed pipeline processing label

removed backend-weight3 label

removed candidate16.5 label

removed missed:16.5 label

removed auto updated label

1 Warning

There were no new or modified feature flag YAML files detected in this MR. If the changes here are already controlled under an existing feature flag, please add the feature flagexists. Otherwise, if you think the changes here don't need to be under a feature flag, please add the label feature flagskipped, and add a short comment about why we skipped the feature flag. For guidance on when to use a feature flag, please see the documentation.

	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/ci/troubleshooting.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	@a_luna (UTC-5, 7 hours behind author)	@bmarjanovic (UTC+2, same timezone as author)
~"Verify"	Reviewer review is optional for ~"Verify"	@drew (UTC+0, 2 hours behind author)

Please check reviewer's status!

• Reviewer is available!
• Reviewer is unavailable!

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

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

e2e-test-on-gdk: test report for d15a0158

expand test summary

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            suites summary                             |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|                  | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Govern           | 45     | 0      | 3       | 0     | 48    | ✅     |
| Monitor          | 4      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 4     | ✅     |
| Verify           | 20     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 20    | ✅     |
| Plan             | 55     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 55    | ✅     |
| Create           | 40     | 0      | 6       | 0     | 46    | ✅     |
| Manage           | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Package          | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Data Stores      | 22     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 22    | ✅     |
| Framework sanity | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total            | 186    | 0      | 12      | 0     | 198   | ✅     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

e2e-package-and-test: test report for d15a0158

expand test summary

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                            suites summary                             |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|                  | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Govern           | 297    | 0      | 18      | 6     | 315   | ❗     |
| Data Stores      | 117    | 0      | 3       | 0     | 120   | ✅     |
| Verify           | 150    | 0      | 15      | 3     | 165   | ❗     |
| Create           | 539    | 0      | 117     | 0     | 656   | ✅     |
| Package          | 226    | 0      | 17      | 3     | 243   | ❗     |
| Plan             | 248    | 1      | 10      | 0     | 259   | ❌     |
| Systems          | 8      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 8     | ✅     |
| Manage           | 40     | 0      | 10      | 2     | 50    | ❗     |
| Framework sanity | 0      | 0      | 5       | 0     | 5     | ➖     |
| ModelOps         | 0      | 0      | 6       | 0     | 6     | ➖     |
| Configure        | 1      | 0      | 9       | 0     | 10    | ✅     |
| Release          | 15     | 0      | 3       | 0     | 18    | ✅     |
| GitLab Metrics   | 2      | 0      | 1       | 1     | 3     | ❗     |
| Monitor          | 36     | 0      | 7       | 0     | 43    | ✅     |
| Fulfillment      | 8      | 0      | 69      | 0     | 77    | ✅     |
| Analytics        | 7      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 7     | ✅     |
| Secure           | 6      | 0      | 3       | 0     | 9     | ✅     |
| Growth           | 0      | 0      | 6       | 0     | 6     | ➖     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total            | 1700   | 1      | 299     | 15    | 2000  | ❌     |
+------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

@Kasia_Misirli Can you do the initial review, please?

And if you approve, can you pass it to @lauraX for the final review?

requested review from @Kasia_Misirli

added 203 commits

• 9b8ea95a...bce87a26 - 201 commits from branch master
• e198a1dc - Refactor usage of .gitlab-ci.yml as the default CI Config
• d15a0158 - Fix the doc

Compare with previous version

added documentation label

approved this merge request

@Kasia_Misirli, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request has been approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

• rspec predictive jobs
• jest predictive jobs
• merging a merge request.

added pipeline:mr-approved label

requested review from @lauraX

removed review request for @Kasia_Misirli

@furkanayhan Some end-to-end (E2E) tests should run based on the stage label.

Please start the trigger-omnibus-and-follow-up-e2e job in the qa stage and ensure tests in the follow-up-e2e:package-and-test-ee pipeline pass before this MR is merged. (E2E tests are computationally intensive and don't run automatically for every push/rebase, so we ask you to run this job manually at least once.)

To run all E2E tests, apply the pipeline:run-all-e2e label and run a new pipeline.

E2E test jobs are allowed to fail due to flakiness. See current failures at the latest pipeline triage issue.

Once done, apply the emoji on this comment.

Team members only: for any questions or help, reach out on the internal #quality Slack channel.

added pipeline:run-all-e2e label

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

approved this merge request

resolved all threads

1 Warning

There were no new or modified feature flag YAML files detected in this MR. If the changes here are already controlled under an existing feature flag, please add the feature flagexists. Otherwise, if you think the changes here don't need to be under a feature flag, please add the label feature flagskipped, and add a short comment about why we skipped the feature flag. For guidance on when to use a feature flag, please see the documentation.

	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/ci/troubleshooting.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	@a_luna (UTC-5, 7 hours behind author)	@bmarjanovic (UTC+2, same timezone as author)
~"Verify"	Reviewer review is optional for ~"Verify"	@stanhu (UTC-7, 9 hours behind author)

Please check reviewer's status!

• Reviewer is available!
• Reviewer is unavailable!

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

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for ffce3cef succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit 018336dd

mentioned in merge request !134887 (merged)

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowproduction label

mentioned in issue #26169

@lauraX could we add the ~verify-review:: label?

added verify-reviewnot impacted label

added releasedcandidate label

mentioned in merge request !136549 (merged)

mentioned in issue #372862 (closed)