Add padding in Merge request analytics table
What does this MR do and why?
On the Merge request analytics page, this MR add padding between the 2 lines of text in the first table cell. This change aligns with the spacing guidelines in Pajamas.
Related KR: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gitlab-OKRs/-/work_items/4493+
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
changed milestone to %16.9
added UI polish frontend groupoptimize severity4 labels
assigned to @lvanc
added devopsplan sectiondev labels
- Resolved by 🤖 GitLab Bot 🤖
Proper labels assigned to this merge request. Please ignore me.
@lvanc - please see the following guidance and update this merge request.1 Error Please add typebug typefeature, or typemaintenance label to this merge request. Edited by 🤖 GitLab Bot 🤖
added docs-only label
5 Warnings d790c2e7: The commit subject may not be longer than 72 characters. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. ab872971: The commit subject may not be longer than 72 characters. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. 29a47a56: The commit subject may not be longer than 72 characters. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. 73f58cbe: The commit subject may not be longer than 72 characters. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. 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 @elwyn-gitlab
(UTC+13, 23 hours ahead of author)
@xanf
(UTC+2, 12 hours ahead of author)
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
Dangerrequested review from @lvanc
- Resolved by Libor Vanc
@rcrespo3 When you have a moment, can I get a review on this one?
removed docs-only label
Bundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 25fa6e68 and 17ebb0ea
Special assetsEntrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 4.16 MB 4.16 MB - 0.0 % mainChunk 3.12 MB 3.12 MB - 0.0 %
Note: We do not have exact data for 25fa6e68. So we have used data from: d829428f.
The intended commit has no webpack pipeline, so we chose the last commit with one before it.Please look at the full report for more details
Read more about how this report works.
Generated by
Dangerrequested review from @vvempati
E2E Test Result Summary
allure-report-publisher
generated test report!e2e-test-on-gdk:
test report for 17ebb0eaexpand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Plan | 53 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 53 | ✅ | | Create | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 11 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Govern | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | ✅ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 70 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 74 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
e2e-review-qa:
test report for 17ebb0eaexpand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Govern | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | ✅ | | Create | 8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 11 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | ✅ | | Plan | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 20 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 25 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
e2e-package-and-test:
test report for 17ebb0eaexpand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Plan | 246 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 259 | ✅ | | Create | 149 | 0 | 19 | 2 | 168 | ✅ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Govern | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 413 | 0 | 34 | 2 | 447 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
added typemaintenance label
requested review from @xanf
- Resolved by Illya Klymov
@vvempati
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request has been approved. To ensure we don't only run predictive pipelines, and we don't break
master
, a new pipeline will be started shortly.Please wait for the pipeline to start before resolving this discussion and set auto-merge for the new pipeline. See merging a merge request for more details.
added pipeline:mr-approved label
removed review request for @rcrespo3
enabled an automatic merge when all merge checks for d790c2e7 pass
enabled an automatic merge when all merge checks for 17ebb0ea pass
mentioned in commit 9a381203
added workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label
@xanf this MR was mentioned in the following issue that was created be GitLab Release Tool Bot:
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/release/tasks/-/issues/8304#groupoptimize-groupoptimize
I am not familiar with this process. What action is required?
@lvanc feel free to ignore it for yourself
added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label
added releasedcandidate label