Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects

Simplify comparison for oauth detection for onboarding

4 unresolved threads

What does this MR do and why?

Simplify comparison for oauth detection for onboarding

  • we can merely compare entire string as the params are stripped in the base_stored_user_location_path method due to the use of .path on the URI parsing.

MR acceptance checklist

Please evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

Screenshots or screen recordings

Screenshots are required for UI changes, and strongly recommended for all other merge requests.

Before After

How to set up and validate locally

Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.

Merge request reports

Loading
Loading
5 5 milestone: '16.3'
6 6 type: development
7 7 group: group::optimize
8 default_enabled: false
8 default_enabled: true
  • Ghost User
    Ghost User @ghost1 started a thread on the diff
  • 12 @fog_file = fog_file
    13 @path = fog_file.key
    14 @size = fog_file.content_length
    15 @bucket_prefix = bucket_prefix
    16 end
    17
    18 def in_final_location?
    19 path.include?('/@final/')
    20 end
    21
    22 def orphan?
    23 !job_artifact_record_exists? && !pending_direct_upload?
    24 end
    25
    26 def delete
    27 fog_file.destroy
    • Contributor

      When using update, upsert, delete, update_all, upsert_all, delete_all or destroy_all you must include the full database query and query execution plan in the merge request description, and request a database review.

      This comment can be ignored if the object is not an ActiveRecord class, since no database query would be generated.


      For more information, see Database Review documentation.

    • Please register or sign in to reply
  • Ghost User
    Ghost User @ghost1 started a thread on the diff
  • 15 LAST_PAGE_MARKER_REDIS_KEY = 'orphan-job-artifact-objects-cleanup-last-page-marker'
    16
    17 def initialize(provider: nil, dry_run: true, force_restart: false, logger: Gitlab::AppLogger)
    18 @paginator = determine_paginator!(provider)
    19 @dry_run = dry_run
    20 @force_restart = force_restart
    21 @logger = logger
    22 end
    23
    24 def run!
    25 log_info('Looking for orphan job artifact objects under the `@final` directories')
    26
    27 each_final_object do |object|
    28 next unless object.orphan?
    29
    30 object.delete unless dry_run
    • Contributor

      When using update, upsert, delete, update_all, upsert_all, delete_all or destroy_all you must include the full database query and query execution plan in the merge request description, and request a database review.

      This comment can be ignored if the object is not an ActiveRecord class, since no database query would be generated.


      For more information, see Database Review documentation.

    • Please register or sign in to reply
  • Ghost User
    Ghost User @ghost1 started a thread on the diff
  • 86
    87 it { is_expected.to be_empty }
    88 end
    89 end
    90
    91 context 'without any arguments' do
    69 92 let(:params) { {} }
    70 93
    71 let_it_be(:runner_manager) { create(:ci_runner_machine, runner: runner) }
    94 let_it_be(:runner_manager1) { create(:ci_runner_machine, runner: runner) }
    95 let_it_be(:runner_manager2) { create(:ci_runner_machine, runner: runner) }
    72 96
    73 it 'returns all runner managers' do
    74 expect(runner_managers).to contain_exactly(runner_manager)
    97 it 'returns all runner managers in id_desc order' do
    98 expect(runner_managers).to eq([runner_manager2, runner_manager1])
    • Contributor
      Suggested change
      98 expect(runner_managers).to eq([runner_manager2, runner_manager1])
      98 expect(runner_managers).to match_array([runner_manager2, runner_manager1])

      If order of the result is not important, please consider using match_array to avoid flakiness.

    • Please register or sign in to reply
  • Contributor
    2 Errors
    🚫 69b7d368: The commit subject must start with a capital letter. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.
    🚫 The database migration pipeline
    must be triggered by the job db:gitlabcom-database-testing must be run before requesting
    database review. This job takes ~30m and will post the results to a comment on the merge
    request. Please run and review any results before passing to a reviewer.
    8 Warnings

    For the following files, a review from the Data team and Analytics Instrumentation team is recommended
    Please check the analytics instrumentation Service Ping guide or the Snowplow guide.

    For MR review guidelines, see the Internal Analytics review guidelines.

    • app/assets/javascripts/tracking/constants.js
    • app/assets/javascripts/tracking/internal_events.js
    This merge request is definitely too big (9184 lines changed), please split it into multiple merge requests.
    This merge request includes more than 10 commits. Each commit should meet the following criteria:
    1. Have a well-written commit message.
    2. Has all tests passing when used on its own (e.g. when using git checkout SHA).
    3. Can be reverted on its own without also requiring the revert of commit that came before it.
    4. Is small enough that it can be reviewed in isolation in under 30 minutes or so.

    If this merge request contains commits that do not meet this criteria and/or contains intermediate work, please rebase these commits into a smaller number of commits or split this merge request into multiple smaller merge requests.

    e0e06e4a: The commit subject must contain at least 3 words. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.
    09193b50: Commits that change 30 or more lines across at least 3 files should describe these changes in the commit body. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.
    fabf68d6: Commits that change 30 or more lines across at least 3 files should describe these changes in the commit body. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines.
    This merge request has more than 20 commits which may cause issues in some of the jobs. If you see errors like missing commits, please consider squashing some commits so it is within 20 commits.
    This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone.
    4 Messages
    📖 This merge request adds or changes files that require a review from the CI/CD Templates maintainers.
    📖 This merge request adds or changes files that require a review from the Database team.
    📖 This MR contains docs in the /development directory. Any Maintainer, other than the author, can merge. You do not need tech writer review.
    📖 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.

    This merge request requires a CI/CD Template review. To make sure these changes are reviewed, take the following steps:

    1. Ensure the merge request has the citemplates label. If the merge request modifies CI/CD Template files, Danger will do this for you.
    2. Prepare your MR for a CI/CD Template review according to the template development guide.
    3. Assign and @ mention the CI/CD Template reviewer suggested by Reviewer Roulette.

    The following files require a review from the CI/CD Templates maintainers:

    • lib/gitlab/ci/templates/Security/DAST-On-Demand-Scan.gitlab-ci.yml
    • lib/gitlab/ci/templates/Security/DAST-Runner-Validation.gitlab-ci.yml

    This merge request requires a database review. To make sure these changes are reviewed, take the following steps:

    1. Ensure the merge request has database and databasereview pending labels. If the merge request modifies database files, Danger will do this for you.
    2. Prepare your MR for database review according to the docs.
    3. Assign and mention the database reviewer suggested by Reviewer Roulette.

    The following files require a review from the Database team:

    • db/migrate/20240103200822_replace_fk_on_approval_merge_request_rules_scan_result_policy_id.rb
    • db/migrate/20240103202629_validate_fk_on_approval_merge_request_rules_scan_result_policy_id.rb
    • db/migrate/20240103203314_remove_old_fk_on_approval_merge_request_rules_scan_result_policy_id.rb
    • db/schema_migrations/20240103200822
    • db/schema_migrations/20240103202629
    • db/schema_migrations/20240103203314
    • app/finders/ci/jobs_finder.rb
    • app/finders/ci/runner_managers_finder.rb
    • db/structure.sql

    Notification to the Data Team about changes to files with possible impact on Data Warehouse, add label Data Warehouse::Impact Check.

    The following files require a review:

    • db/structure.sql

    Documentation review

    The following files require a review from a technical writer:

    The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:

    Multiversion compatibility

    This merge request updates GraphQL backend and frontend code.

    To prevent an incident, ensure the updated frontend code is backwards compatible.

    For more information, see the multiversion compatibility documentation.

    Pipeline Changes

    This merge request contains changes to the pipeline configuration for the GitLab project.

    Please consider the effect of the changes in this merge request on the following:

    Please consider communicating these changes to the broader team following the communication guideline for pipeline changes

    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
    analytics instrumentation @michold profile link current availability (UTC+1, same timezone as author) Maintainer review is optional for analytics instrumentation
    backend @mc_rocha profile link current availability (UTC-5, 6 hours behind author) @j.seto profile link current availability (UTC+0, 1 hour behind author)
    citemplates @timofurrer profile link current availability (UTC+1, same timezone as author) @tigerwnz profile link current availability (UTC+8, 7 hours ahead of author)
    database @mhamda profile link current availability (UTC+1, same timezone as author) @tigerwnz profile link current availability (UTC+8, 7 hours ahead of author)
    frontend @dstull profile link current availability (UTC-5, 6 hours behind author) @iamphill profile link current availability (UTC+0, 1 hour behind author)
    test for spec/features/* @mc_rocha profile link current availability (UTC-5, 6 hours behind author) Maintainer review is optional for test for spec/features/*

    Please check reviewer's status!

    • available Reviewer is available!
    • unavailable 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

  • A deleted user added Data WarehouseImpact Check label
  • closed

  • Please register or sign in to reply
    Loading