Fix polling on vuln details page
What does this MR do and why?
This MR fixes a poll bug which happens when a user switches the tab. We use visibilityjs
to bind a listener so that when the user puts the window into background we stop polling. Just figured out together with @dpisek that when we deregister, somehow we stop rebinding the listener.
Screenshots or screen recordings
How to set up and validate locally
- Clone https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/security/security-reports/
- Run the pipeline by going into Your project > CI/CD > Pipelines
- Click on run pipeline for master branch
- Go to Security & Compliance > Vulnerability Report > Click on a Vulnerability
- Change the state, it will generate a history entry
- Switch the tab to trigger
Visibility.change
.
Expected behaviour: It should keep polling. Actual behaviour: It stops polling.
You should have the runner installed in order to run the pipeline. Then using the following command you can register the runner, it guides you pretty good on how to set the runner:
$ gitlab-runner register
Once it's installed this is how I run the runner:
$ gitlab-runner --log-level debug run local-runner --config ~/.gitlab-runner/config.toml restart
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.
Merge request reports
Activity
assigned to @svedova
requested review from @dpisek
requested review from @aturinske
- Resolved by Kushal Pandya
@dpisek I initially assigned you to review but since we paired on this I'm gonna ask @aturinske to review it. Alexander, got some time for a frontend review?
- A deleted user
added frontend label
2 Warnings Please add a merge request type to this merge request. This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone. 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 Ammar Alakkad ( @aalakkad
) (UTC+3, same timezone as@svedova
)Jacques Erasmus ( @jerasmus
) (UTC+2, 1 hour behind@svedova
)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 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
DangerBundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 4090646c and 5dd1f8c1
Special assetsEntrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 3.23 MB 3.23 MB +1.23 KB 0.0 % mainChunk 1.89 MB 1.89 MB - 0.0 % Significant Growth: 2Expand
Entrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent pages.projects.packages.packages.index 768.48 KB 920.82 KB +152.34 KB 19.8 % pages.groups.packages.index 23.23 KB 175.05 KB +151.83 KB 653.7 %
Your MR has at least one entrypoint growing significantly (more > 1 KB or 2%). If you write new or extend existing features, this is expected and there is nothing to worry about.
Please consider pinging someone from the FE Foundations (
@dmishunov
,@justin_ho
,@mikegreiling
or@nmezzopera
) for review, if you are unsure about the size increase.Note: We do not have exact data for 4090646c. So we have used data from: 5ed342ce.
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-review
job
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
DangerAllure report
allure-report-publisher
generated test report for 5dd1f8c1!review-qa-smoke:
test reportremoved review request for @dpisek
- Resolved by Kushal Pandya
- Resolved by Alexander Turinske
- Resolved by Alexander Turinske
Setting label groupthreat insights based on
@svedova
's group.added groupthreat insights label
mentioned in issue #228746
requested review from @kushalpandya and removed review request for @aturinske
@aturinske
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline has been started.
For more info, please refer to the following links:
Setting label(s) devopssecure sectionsec based on groupthreat insights.
added devopssecure sectionsec labels
mentioned in commit 511876d1
added workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label
added releasedcandidate label
mentioned in merge request kubitus-project/kubitus-installer!306 (merged)
added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label