Jira app - improve setup required instructions for GitLab.com
What does this MR do and why?
Based on the #430044 (closed), we're updating instructions for GitLab.com installations.
Screenshots or screen recordings
| Before | After |
|---|---|
 |
 |
How to set up and validate locally
suggestion: Use the https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/manage/integrations/jira-connect-test-tool to validate locally.
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 #430044 (closed)
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %16.7
assigned to @bmarjanovic
2 Warnings 
featureaddition and featureenhancement merge requests normally have a documentation change. Consider adding a documentation update or confirming the documentation plan with the Technical Writer counterpart.
For more information, see:
- The Handbook page on merge request types.
- The definition of done documentation.
You've made some app changes, but didn't add any tests.
That's OK as long as you're refactoring existing code,
but please consider adding any of the maintenancepipelines, maintenancerefactor, maintenanceworkflow, documentation, QA labels.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 frontend @aalakkad
(UTC+3, 2 hours ahead of author)
@afontaine (UTC-5, 6 hours behind author)
groupimport and integrate (frontend) @justin_ho (UTC+7, 6 hours ahead of author)
Maintainer review is optional for groupimport and integrate (frontend) 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-reviewjob that generated this comment.Generated by
Edited by Ghost UserBundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 89fc3b7b and 4b849902
Entrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 4.12 MB 4.12 MB - 0.0 % mainChunk 3.09 MB 3.09 MB - 0.0 %
Note: We do not have exact data for 89fc3b7b. So we have used data from: 5e835a6b.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun thebundle-size-reviewjob
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.Please look at the full report for more details
Read more about how this report works.
Generated by
Hey @justin_ho
Here are the changes for
.com, could you please take a look from the groupimport and integrate perspective before assigning to the frontend folks?I went with a simple approach, adding an alert modal with description.
requested review from @justin_ho
E2E Test Result Summary
allure-report-publishergenerated test report!e2e-test-on-gdk:
expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Create | 54 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 61 | ✅ | | Plan | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 55 | ✅ | | Package | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Release | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | ✅ | | Govern | 67 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 67 | ✅ | | Verify | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | ✅ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | ✅ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Analytics | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Manage | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 250 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 260 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+e2e-review-qa:
expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Govern | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | ✅ | | Manage | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Create | 6 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | | Plan | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 18 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 26 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+e2e-package-and-test:
expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Manage | 40 | 0 | 10 | 1 | 50 | ✅ | | Create | 149 | 0 | 31 | 1 | 180 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Govern | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Plan | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 215 | 0 | 45 | 2 | 260 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+Edited by Ghost User- Resolved by Justin Ho Tuan Duong
Hey @ashrafkhamis could you please give a review from the Technical Writing side?
@aalakkad could you please give the initial frontend review?
Edited by Bojan Marjanovic - Last reply by Justin Ho Tuan Duong
requested review from @ashrafkhamis and @aalakkad
added Technical Writing UI text labels
removed review request for @ashrafkhamis
requested review from @ashrafkhamis
