Simplify comparison for oauth detection for onboarding
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
Activity
added devopsverify grouprunner sectionci + 1 deleted label
assigned to @pedropombeiro
5 5 milestone: '16.3' 6 6 type: development 7 7 group: group::optimize 8 default_enabled: false 8 default_enabled: true You're about to release the feature with the feature flag. This process can only be done after the global rollout on production. Please make sure in the rollout issue that the preliminary steps have already been done. Otherwise, changing the YAML definition might not have the desired effect.
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 When using
update
,upsert
,delete
,update_all
,upsert_all
,delete_all
ordestroy_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.
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 When using
update
,upsert
,delete
,update_all
,upsert_all
,delete_all
ordestroy_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.
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]) 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 jobdb: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: - Have a well-written commit message.
- Has all tests passing when used on its own (e.g. when using git checkout SHA).
- Can be reverted on its own without also requiring the revert of commit that came before it.
- 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:
- Ensure the merge request has the citemplates label. If the merge request modifies CI/CD Template files, Danger will do this for you.
- Prepare your MR for a CI/CD Template review according to the template development guide.
- 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:
- Ensure the merge request has database and databasereview pending labels. If the merge request modifies database files, Danger will do this for you.
- Prepare your MR for database review according to the docs.
- 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:
-
doc/ci/secrets/gcp_secret_manager.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/administration/job_artifacts_troubleshooting.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/api/discussions.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/ci/secrets/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/ci/testing/code_quality.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/ci/variables/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/ci/yaml/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/application_security/container_scanning/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/application_security/dependency_scanning/index.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/application_security/policies/scan-execution-policies.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/application_security/policies/scan-result-policies.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/application_security/secret_detection/pre_receive.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/custom_roles/abilities.md
(Link to current live version) -
doc/user/group/issues_analytics/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.
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:
- Effects on different pipeline types
- Effects on non-canonical projects:
gitlab-foss
security
dev
- personal forks
- Effects on pipeline performance
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
(UTC+1, same timezone as author)
Maintainer review is optional for analytics instrumentation backend @mc_rocha
(UTC-5, 6 hours behind author)
@j.seto
(UTC+0, 1 hour behind author)
citemplates @timofurrer
(UTC+1, same timezone as author)
@tigerwnz
(UTC+8, 7 hours ahead of author)
database @mhamda
(UTC+1, same timezone as author)
@tigerwnz
(UTC+8, 7 hours ahead of author)
frontend @dstull
(UTC-5, 6 hours behind author)
@iamphill
(UTC+0, 1 hour behind author)
test for spec/features/*
@mc_rocha
(UTC-5, 6 hours behind author)
Maintainer review is optional for test for spec/features/*
Please check reviewer's status!
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
mentioned in commit gitlab-org-sandbox/gitlab-jh-validation@a60f9f4e