Conflicts:
- `app/models/status.rb`:
Upstream added lines close to a glitch-soc only line, not a real conflict.
Applied upstream's changes (added hooks) while keeping glitch-soc's changes
(`local_only` scope).
- `config/environments/production.rb`:
Upstream removed a header, while we have glitch-soc specific ones.
Removed the header removed upstream.
Conflicts:
- .github/workflows/build-image.yml
We don't use GitHub Actions for building Docker images.
- Gemfile.lock
Versions were upgraded upstream that conflicted with our changes, simply applied upstream changes.
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`:
Upstream README has been changed, but we have a completely different one.
Kept our `README.md`.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Change the code style to match upstream's but otherwise do not change our
code.
- `spec/lib/sanitize_config_spec.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Kept our version, since the tests are mostly glitch-soc's, except for cases
which are purposefuly different.
Conflicts:
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream added a line at the end of the file, while glitch-soc had its own
extra lines.
Took upstream's change.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`:
We have our custom CONTRIBUTING.md quoting upstream. Upstream made changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `app/controllers/application_controller.rb`:
Upstream made code style changes in a method that is entirely replaced
in glitch-soc.
Ignored the change.
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Code style changes textually close to glitch-soc-specific changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Ignored them.
