Expose blob mode in GraphQL for repository files

What does this MR do?

For #215395 (closed)

This MR adds the blob mode to the returned GraphQL response.

Screenshots

N/A, all backstage

Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

Conformity

• [-] Changelog entry
• [-] Documentation (if required)
• Code review guidelines
• Merge request performance guidelines
• Style guides
• [-] Database guides
• [-] Separation of EE specific content

Availability and Testing

• Review and add/update tests for this feature/bug. Consider all test levels. See the Test Planning Process.
• Tested in all supported browsers
• [-] Informed Infrastructure department of a default or new setting change, if applicable per definition of done

Security

If this MR contains changes to processing or storing of credentials or tokens, authorization and authentication methods and other items described in the security review guidelines:

• [-] Label as security and @ mention @gitlab-com/gl-security/appsec
• [-] The MR includes necessary changes to maintain consistency between UI, API, email, or other methods
• [-] Security reports checked/validated by a reviewer from the AppSec team

changed milestone to %13.2

added Category:Source Code Management Deliverable devopscreate frontend groupsource code repository severity4 typebug workflowready for development labels

unmarked as a Work In Progress

changed title from Draft: Resolve "Add symlink icon to file rows in repository browser" to Expose blob mode in GraphQL for repository files

changed the description

assigned to @thomasrandolph

added 6 commits

• 6566448f...f3625de4 - 5 commits from branch master
• c291e822 - Add file mode to repository blobs

Compare with previous version

added documentation label

	1 Message
	This merge request adds or changes files that require a review from the Technical Writing team.

Documentation review

The following files require a review from a technical writer:

• doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md

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

• Technical Writers assignments for the appropriate technical writer for this review.
• Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected! A merge request is normally reviewed by both a reviewer and a maintainer in its primary category (e.g. frontend or backend), and by a maintainer in all other categories.

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited, or the chosen person is unavailable.

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, mention them as you normally would! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
frontend	André Luís (@andr3) (UTC+1, 7 hours ahead @thomasrandolph)	Denys Mishunov (@dmishunov) (UTC+2, 8 hours ahead @thomasrandolph)
backend	Aleksei Lipniagov (@alipniagov) (UTC+3, 9 hours ahead @thomasrandolph)	Imre Farkas (@ifarkas) (UTC+2, 8 hours ahead @thomasrandolph)

These files couldn't be categorised, so Danger was unable to suggest a reviewer. Please consider creating a merge request to add support for them.

• doc/api/graphql/reference/gitlab_schema.graphql
• doc/api/graphql/reference/gitlab_schema.json

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

added featureaddition label and removed documentation label

added typefeature label

added workflowin dev label and removed typefeature workflowready for development labels

changed the description

@sstern Could you review this GQL addition?

@marcia I think the schema documentation needs your review!

@seanarnold Adding this field to a GraphQL Ruby file requires your backend review!

assigned to @sstern, @marcia, and @seanarnold

Bundle size analysis [beta]

This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits f35d6e43 and 95e080dd

Special assets

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
average	4.15 MB	4.15 MB	-	0.0 %
mainChunk	3.26 MB	3.26 MB	-	0.0 %

---

Please look at the full report for more details

---

Read more about how this report works.

Generated by Danger

added 1 commit

• fb2328b8 - Add file mode to repository blobs

Compare with previous version

added documentation label

added 1 commit

• 270e4760 - Add file mode to repository blobs

Compare with previous version

mentioned in merge request !36524 (merged)

mentioned in issue thomasrandolph/todo#4 (closed)

added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label

approved this merge request

unassigned @sstern

@ifarkas In the interest of hopefully getting this MR in soon (especially since !36524 (merged) depends on it), I'm passing this along to you for a maintainer review!

I think this is primarily backend work (the only exception is the single line, 4-character .graphql change on the frontend). Let me know what you think!

assigned to @ifarkas

approved this merge request

unassigned @seanarnold

mentioned in issue gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com#6764 (closed)

Thanks @thomasrandolph! Looks good, just a tiny question.

Also, does it need a changelog as this has the ~bug label?

unassigned @ifarkas

added 61 commits

• 270e4760...f7628b8b - 60 commits from branch master
• 25d53486 - Add file mode to repository blobs

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 95e080dd - Add changelog for newly exposed GQL value

Compare with previous version

@ifarkas I've updated everything to include "in numeric format".

I should note that the numeric format is the only one I've ever received, but I don't actually know that that is guaranteed.

I'm also removing ~bug since the issue this is partially addressing is a bug, but the changes in this MR don't address a bug. Specifically: The bug is that the UI is missing an icon, but this MR is just facilitating adding that icon by adding more to the GraphQL response - I think generally an enhancement. Adding a changelog, regardless! Thank you!

Back to you again?

removed typebug label

assigned to @ifarkas

assigned to @mjang1 and unassigned @marcia

added Technical Writing docsfeature twdoing labels

unassigned @mjang1

approved this merge request

Thanks @thomasrandolph, looks good to me! We are still waiting for documentation approval, so not merging yet.

unassigned @ifarkas

assigned to @mjang1

mentioned in issue #215395 (closed)

mentioned in issue #228955

approved this merge request

added twfinished label and removed twdoing label

assigned to @ifarkas and unassigned @thomasrandolph and @mjang1

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 69ecc397 succeeds

All approvals received, MWPS set.

Thank you, @ifarkas!

merged

mentioned in commit fb650c46

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowin review label

Is this merge request causing an issue with canary? I suspect the frontend is requesting mode for the GraphQL endpoint, but we're querying the old API servers, so we get this error:

mentioned in issue #229348 (closed)

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

mentioned in merge request !37746 (merged)

mentioned in merge request !40033 (merged)

mentioned in issue #246317 (closed)

added typemaintenance label