Support Project Avatar removal in REST API
This change set adds support to remove project avatars using the REST API, much like it's already possible for the Topics API.
To support this I've changed the POST | PUT /projects
endpoint to be
handled by workhorse. Can someone with more experience and the big
picture verify this particular part of the change? Is this something
which makes sense? Is it implemented correctly?
If this is the case and all looks good with the Projects API here, I'll
also implement similar changes to the other Avatarable
endpoints, like
Groups and Users.
This change was driven by a request in the terraform provider.
/cc @nagyv-gitlab @nmezzopera can you help me triage this?
Merge request reports
Activity
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
Hey @tuxtimo!
Thank you for your contribution to GitLab. Please refer to the contribution flow documentation for a quick overview of the process, and the merge request (MR) guidelines for the detailed process.
When you're ready for a first review, post
@gitlab-bot ready
. If you know a relevant reviewer(s) (for example, someone that was involved in a related issue), you can also assign them directly with@gitlab-bot ready @user1 @user2
.At any time, if you need help moving the MR forward, feel free to post
@gitlab-bot help
. Read more on how to get help.To enable automated checks on your MR, please configure Danger for your fork.
You can comment
@gitlab-bot label <label1> <label2>
to add labels to your MR. Please see the list of allowed labels in thelabel
command documentation.This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
added Community contribution workflowin dev labels
assigned to @tuxtimo
mentioned in commit tuxtimo/gitlab@168fcb6f
added workflowready for review label and removed workflowin dev label
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
Hi @msedlakjakubowski! Please review this documentation merge request.
This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
added documentation twtriaged labels
@mwoolf, this Community contribution is ready for review.
- Do you have capacity and domain expertise to review this? We are mindful of your time, so if you are not able to take this on, please re-assign to one or more other reviewers.
- Add the workflowin dev label if the merge request needs action from the author.
This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
requested review from @mwoolf
mentioned in commit tuxtimo/gitlab@1178219c
Does anyone have an idea why this breaks uploading an avatar using the following
curl
command:curl -X POST "http://gdk.test:3000/api/v4/projects" --header 'PRIVATE-TOKEN: <your private token>' --form avatar=@./spec/fixtures/banana_sample.gif --form name="test-project"
It results in an
{"error":"avatar is invalid"}
error ...Edited by Marcin Sedlak-Jakubowski@tuxtimo In case it's not a placeholder, consider changing your private token now
@tuxtimo I haven't tested this, but can the error be related to you using a GIF there?
In case it's not a placeholder, consider changing your private token now
Thanks for letting me know - in this case is okay though
I haven't tested this, but can the error be related to you using a GIF there?
Good question and I'll certainly check if it makes a different with the workhorse uploading - However, it's a use-case which was supported before as indicated by this test.
@tuxtimo sorry for the late reply here, could this have anything to do with the other workhorse errors https://gitlab.com/tuxtimo/gitlab/-/jobs/2765051691?
Maybe try rebasing off latest master and see if the errors go away. It's hard to debug errors with workhorse file uploading when the workhorse tests are failing
@acook.gitlab Workhorse changes need to be approved by a Workhorse maintainer. Why did we skip that?
@jacobvosmaer-gitlab I was not aware there was a separate workhorse maintainer program, I'll be sure to ping you in the future
@acook.gitlab we have a CI bot that posts reviewer suggestions: !92604 (comment 1029253502)
This reminds you that a Workhorse review is required.
I also noticed the following in the MR description:
To support this I've changed the
POST | PUT /projects
endpoint to be handled by workhorse. Can someone with more experience and the big picture verify this particular part of the change? Is this something which makes sense?
mentioned in issue gitlab-org/quality/triage-reports#8393 (closed)
added workflowin dev label and removed workflowready for review label
added workflowin review label and removed workflowin dev label
Suggested Reviewers (beta)
The individuals below may be good candidates to participate in the review based on various factors.
You can use slash commands in comments to quickly assign
/assign_reviewer @user1
.Suggested Reviewers @rspeicher
,@mayra-cabrera
,@marin
,@psimyn
,@godfat
If you do not believe these suggestions are useful, please apply the label Bad Suggested Reviewer. You can also provide feedback for this feature on this issue:
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/357923
.Automatically generated by Suggested Reviewers Bot - an experimental ML-based recommendation engine created by ~"group::applied ml".
- A deleted user
added backend featureaddition typefeature labels
1 Warning This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone. 1 Message 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. Documentation review
The following files require a review from a technical writer:
doc/api/projects.md
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.
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 backend Erick Bajao ( @iamricecake
) (UTC+8)Michael Kozono ( @mkozono
) (UTC-10)workhorse Ash McKenzie ( @ashmckenzie
) (UTC+10)Jacob Vosmaer ( @jacobvosmaer-gitlab
) (UTC+2)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
Danger- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
@acook.gitlab This might be an interesting MR to review? Up for it? If you're busy, assign it back to me
requested review from @acook.gitlab and removed review request for @mwoolf
changed milestone to %15.3
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
@acook.gitlab
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, please start a new pipeline before merging.
For more info, please refer to the following links:
removed review request for @acook.gitlab
requested review from @msedlakjakubowski
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
added Technical Writing docsfeature twfinished labels and removed twtriaged label
removed review request for @msedlakjakubowski
requested review from @acook.gitlab
- Resolved by See GitLab account @timofurrer
@acook.gitlab what is holding us back here from merging this MR? I see it has been approved but I don't fully understand why it wasn't merged yet?
added workflowready for review label and removed workflowin review label
@acook.gitlab
, this Community contribution is ready for review.- Do you have capacity and domain expertise to review this? We are mindful of your time, so if you are not able to take this on, please re-assign to one or more other reviewers.
- Add the workflowin dev label if the merge request needs action from the author. This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
added workflowin dev label and removed workflowready for review label
mentioned in commit tuxtimo/gitlab@7aa7fd58
added 5233 commits
-
45a5a8a9...00254e58 - 5231 commits from branch
gitlab-org:master
- 7aa7fd58 - Support Project Avatar removal in REST API
- 25de458b - WIP
-
45a5a8a9...00254e58 - 5231 commits from branch
mentioned in commit tuxtimo/gitlab@5223a34c
mentioned in commit tuxtimo/gitlab@b323ddac