Conflicts:
- `app/views/settings/preferences/other/show.html.haml`:
Upstream moved some settings, where glitch-soc has an extra setting.
Ported upstream changes, moving the same settings as them.
Conflicts:
- `db/schema.rb`:
Upstream regenerated the schema file using Rails 7, the conflicts are
caused by our extra columns.
Applied upstream's changes, but keeping our extra columns.
Conflicts:
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Upstream added new validations close to lines on which glitch-soc had
modified validations to handle custom limits set through environment
variables.
Ported upstream changes.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream added `AZURE_ALIAS_HOST`. Glitch-soc's version of the file is
completely different.
Added `AZURE_ALIAS_HOST` to our version of the file.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream entirely refactored this, while we changed the docker repository
to upload to and disabled the “latest” tag.
Applied the repository change to `.github/workflows/build-*.yml`, as well
as disabling native ARMv64 builds.
- `README.md`:
We have a completely different README.
Kept ours.
- `app/views/admin/settings/shared/_links.html.haml`:
Upstream refactored, we had an extra item.
Refactored as upstream did.
- `spec/controllers/api/v1/timelines/public_controller_spec.rb`:
Upstream deleted this file, to be replaced by a request spec at
`spec/requests/api/v1/timelines/public_spec.rb`.
We had an extra bit about enabling the public timelines because we have
different defaults than upstream.
Moved that bit to `spec/requests/api/v1/timelines/public_spec.rb`
Conflicts:
- `app/views/admin/settings/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Upstream enforced an uniform code style around lambdas, and glitch-soc
had a different lambda due to its theming system.
Applied the same code style changes.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Upstream enforced an uniform code style around lambdas, and glitch-soc
removed some code just after the lambda.
Applied the same code style changes.
Conflicts:
- `app/views/settings/profiles/show.html.haml`:
Upstream redesigned the settings page, where glitch-soc had changes because of
the ability to set some custom limits.
Went with upstream's design while keeping our custom limits.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream updated dependencies textually close to a glitch-soc-only dependency.
Updated the dependnencies as well.
Conflicts:
- `.github/dependabot.yml`:
Upstream made changes, but we had removed it.
Discarded upstream changes.
- `.rubocop_todo.yml`:
Upstream regenerated the file, we had some glitch-soc-specific ignores.
- `app/models/account_statuses_filter.rb`:
Minor upstream code style change where glitch-soc had slightly different code
due to handling of local-only posts.
Updated to match upstream's code style.
- `app/models/status.rb`:
Upstream moved ActiveRecord callback definitions, glitch-soc had an extra one.
Moved the definitions as upstream did.
- `app/services/backup_service.rb`:
Upstream rewrote a lot of the backup service, glitch-soc had changes because
of exporting local-only posts.
Took upstream changes and added back code to deal with local-only posts.
- `config/routes.rb`:
Upstream split the file into different files, while glitch-soc had a few
extra routes.
Extra routes added to `config/routes/settings.rb`, `config/routes/api.rb`
and `config/routes/admin.rb`
- `db/schema.rb`:
Upstream has new migrations, while glitch-soc had an extra migration.
Updated the expected serial number to match upstream's.
- `lib/mastodon/version.rb`:
Upstream added support to set version tags from environment variables, while
glitch-soc has an extra `+glitch` tag.
Changed the code to support upstream's feature but prepending a `+glitch`.
- `spec/lib/activitypub/activity/create_spec.rb`:
Minor code style change upstream, while glitch-soc has extra tests due to
`directMessage` handling.
Applied upstream's changes while keeping glitch-soc's extra tests.
- `spec/models/concerns/account_interactions_spec.rb`:
Minor code style change upstream, while glitch-soc has extra tests.
Applied upstream's changes while keeping glitch-soc's extra tests.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream added a link to the roadmap, but we have a completely different README.
Kept ours.
- `app/models/media_attachment.rb`:
Upstream upped media attachment limits.
Updated the default according to upstream's.
- `db/migrate/20180831171112_create_bookmarks.rb`:
Upstream changed the migration compatibility level.
Did so too.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream refactored this file but we have a different version.
Kept our version.
- `app/controllers/settings/preferences_controller.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file does not directly references individual settings anymore.
Applied upstream changes.
- `app/lib/user_settings_decorator.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file got removed entirely.
Removed it as well.
- `app/models/user.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
References to individual settings have been removed from the file.
Removed them as well.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/notifications/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/other/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `config/settings.yml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
In particular, upstream removed user-specific and unused settings.
Did the same in glitch-soc.
- `spec/controllers/application_controller_spec.rb`:
Conflicts due to glitch-soc's theming system.
Mostly kept our version, as upstream messed up the tests.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream changed their README, we have our own.
Kept ours.
- `app/helpers/application_helper.rb`:
Minor code style fix upstream, on a line that is different in glitch-soc
due to the different theming system.
Applied the code style fix to our own code.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Code style fix on a line next to lines exclusive to glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream updated a dependency textually close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency.
Updated the dependency like upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream switched to pushing to both DockerHub and GitHub Container
Repository, while glitch-soc was already pushing to the latter only.
Updated our configuration to be slightly more consistent with upstream's
naming and styling, but kept our behavior.
- `Gemfile.lock`:
Updated dependencies textually too close to glitch-soc only hcaptcha
dependency.
Updated dependencies as upstream did.
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, but we have a completely different one.
Kept our README, though it probably should be reworked at some point.
- `app/views/auth/sessions/two_factor.html.haml`:
Minor style fix upstream that's on a line glitch-soc removed because
of its different theming system.
Kept our file as is.
- `spec/controllers/health_controller_spec.rb`:
This file apparently did not exist upstream, upstream created it with
different contents but it is functionally the same.
Switched to upstream's version of the file.
- `spec/presenters/instance_presenter_spec.rb`:
Upstream changed the specs around `GITHUB_REPOSITORY`, while glitch-soc
had its own code because it's a fork and does not have the same default
source URL.
Took upstream's change, but with glitch-soc's repo as the default case.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream dependencies textually too close to a glitch-soc only one.
Updated dependencies as upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Discarded upstream changes: we have our own README
- `app/controllers/follower_accounts_controller.rb`:
Port upstream's minor refactoring
* Fix remaining plain %time to %time.formatted
* Add %time.relative-formatted to client format dates on the current day
* Add missing comma dangle to formats
* Use client side message format instead of the server
* Add fallback message to relatve_format.today
* Remove unused translation key and fix js lint issue
Co-authored-by: Effy Elden <effy@effy.space>
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream changed how docker images were built, including how
they were cached.
I don't know much about it, so applied upstream's changes.
- `app/controllers/admin/domain_blocks_controller.rb`:
The feature, that was in glitch-soc, got backported upstream.
It also had a few fixes upstream, so those have been ported!
- `app/javascript/packs/admin.js`:
Glitch-soc changes have been backported upstream. As a result,
some code from `app/javascript/core/admin.js` got added upstream.
Kept our version since our shared Javascript already has that feature.
- `app/models/user.rb`:
Upstream added something to distinguish unusable and unusable-because-moved
accounts, while glitch-soc considers moved accounts usable.
Took upstream's code for `functional_or_moved?` and made `functional?`
call it.
- `app/views/statuses/_simple_status.html.haml`:
Upstream cleaned up code style a bit, on a line that we had custom changes
for.
Applied upstream's change while keeping our change.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream adopted one CSP directive we already had.
The conflict is because of our files being structurally different, but the
change itself was already part of glitch-soc.
Kept our version.
Fixes#20067
Our password autocomplete hints were “off” but that does not prevent current
browsers from trying to autocomplete them anyway, so use `current-password` and
`new-password` so they don't put a newly-generated password in a password
confirmation prompt, or the old password for a password renewal prompt.
