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:
- `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:
- `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.
Conflicts:
- `.github/dependabot.yml`:
Upstream made changes while we have dropped this file.
Keep the file deleted.
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream made changes at the end of the file, where we
had our extra lines.
Just moved our extra lines back at the end.
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
- `app/services/backup_service.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
Conflicts:
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream added a line at the end, glitch-soc had extra entries at the end.
Added upstream's new line before glitch-soc's.
- `Gemfile.lock`:
Upstream updated dependencies while glitch-soc has an extra one (hcaptcha).
Updated dependencies like upstream did.
- `app/controllers/api/v1/statuses_controller.rb`:
Not a real conflict, upstream added a parameter (`allowed_mentions`) where
glitch-soc already had an extra one (`content_type`).
Added upstream's new parameter.
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto-mono.scss`:
A lot of lines were changed upstream due to code style changes, and a lot
of those lines had path changes to accomodate glitch-soc's theming system.
Applied upstream's style changes.
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto.scss`:
A lot of lines were changed upstream due to code style changes, and a lot
of those lines had path changes to accomodate glitch-soc's theming system.
Applied upstream's style changes.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Minor upstream change, our README is completely different.
Kept ours.
- `lib/tasks/assets.rake`:
glitch-soc has extra code to deal with its theming system,
upstream changed a line that exists in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream updated `docker/build-push-action`, and we a different config
for `docker/metadata-action` so the lines directly above were different,
but it's not a real conflict.
Upgraded `docker/build-push-action` as upstream did.
- `app/javascript/mastodon/features/compose/components/compose_form.js`:
Upstream changed the codestyle near a line we had modified to accommodate
configurable character count.
Kept our change.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, while we have a completely different one.
Kept our README.
- `app/controllers/concerns/web_app_controller_concern.rb`:
Conflict because of glitch-soc's theming system.
Additionally, glitch-soc has different behavior regarding moved accounts.
Ported some of the changes, but kept our overall behavior.
- `app/javascript/packs/admin.js`:
Code changes actually applied to `app/javascript/core/admin.js`
Looks like this gem was introduced as a dependency in 89707ad0ac for
testing Miroformat output. The last test using the Microformats gem was
removed in 62782babd0, so I think it is
safe to remove this dependency.
For context, you [can't install the microformats gem with Ruby 3.2](https://github.com/microformats/microformats-ruby/pull/131),
so we can't currently bundle Mastodon with Ruby 3.2. But since we don't
really need this gem, we can just remove it and unblock Ruby 3.2
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Discarded upstream changes: we have our own README
- `app/controllers/follower_accounts_controller.rb`:
Port upstream's minor refactoring
* fix(rubocop): update gems and add performance and rspec
fix(rubocop): update gems and add performance and rspec
- update present rubocop gems
- add rubocop-rspec and rubocop-performance gems
- move rubocop gems to gem group :development, :test in order to
make linting in a github action that runs with RAILS_ENV=test possible
* feat(rubocop): disable some annoyance RSpec cops
To mee these prooved to be more annoying than helpful.
If not agreed, they can be enabled any time.
* fix(rubocop): do not ignore spec/**/*
Because rubocop-rspec should lint the specs as well, and they
deserve to be readable in general. It is relevant code, after all.
* fix(rubocop): change ignore db/**/* to db/schema.rb
because rails cops do some lints for migrations.
E.g. reversable migrations linting and more.
* fix(rubocop): tune rules configs
Bunch of commits squashed:
fix(rubocop): enable Layout/LineLength cop
Because this project has code with line lenghts > 500 chars.
This is not good practice at all, so I strongly suggest to
change the practice in the future.
But allow heredoc, URI and comments to still be long lines
and make the default Max: 120 explicit, by repeating it in the
config. To me this max length seems reasonable. Perhaps
a bit more could be ok for some. But > 500 chars in one line
Seems to be way too long IMHO.
fix(rubocop): Metrics/CyclomaticComplexity Max to 12
The default is 7, perhaps quite strict. But 25 is too loose,
the rule becomes pointless like that.
fix(rubocop): AllCops ruby version, cacheing and more info
- fix the target ruby version from 2.5 to 3.0
- have the cop error messages to be more informative and helpful
- enable cacheing in /tmp
fix(rubocop): Metrics/AbcSize to 34 from 115
Rubocops default is 17. If the rule is at 115 is becomes
pointless.
fix(rubocop): Metrics/BlockLength improvements
- instead of ignoring tasks completely, ignore only the
long blocks that are specific to tasks (task, namespace)
- ignore also concern specific block methods (included, class_methods)
fix(rubocop): Metrics/ClassLength count heredoc array as one line
fix(rubocop): Metrics/MethodLength Max to 25
- the default is 10, but 65 is too loose, so perhaps 25?
fix(rubocop): Metrics/ModuleLength array and heredoc count as one
fix(rubocop): Metrics/PerceivedComplexity to 16 from 25
Rubocops default is 8, so how about only doubling that, instead
of > than tripple it?
fix(rubocop): enable Style/RedundantAssignment
Because I think that this rule would never really hurt,
but improve code quality and readability.
fix(rubocop): enable Style/RescueStandardError
I think everyone that ever had to debug what this can bring
will hopefully agree that this rule totally makes sense.
In the super rare exeptions where this is totally needed,
it can be excluded by disabling comment in that place.
fix(rubocop): Metrics/ParameterLists add explicit defaults and some excludes
* Fix trying to fetch posts from other users when fetching featured posts
* Rate-limit discovery of new subdomains
* Put a limit on recursively discovering new accounts
* Fix trying to fetch posts from other users when fetching featured posts
* Rate-limit discovery of new subdomains
* Put a limit on recursively discovering new accounts
As pointed out by https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/pull/21297#discussion_r1028372193
at least one of our dependencies already dropped support for Ruby 2.6, and we
had removed Ruby 2.6 tests from the CI over a year ago (#16861).
So stop advertising Ruby 2.6 support, bump targeted version, and drop some
compatibility code.
Conflicts:
- `app/views/admin/announcements/edit.html.haml`:
Upstream change too close to theming-related glitch-soc change.
Ported upstream changes.
- `app/views/admin/announcements/new.html.haml`
Upstream change too close to theming-related glitch-soc change.
Ported upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/home_controller.rb`:
Upstream made it so `/web` is available to non-logged-in users
and `/` redirects to `/web` instead of `/about`.
Kept our version since glitch-soc's WebUI doesn't have what's
needed yet and I think /about is still a much better landing
page anyway.
- `app/models/form/admin_settings.rb`:
Upstream added new settings, and glitch-soc had an extra setting.
Not really a conflict.
Added upstream's new settings.
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream added a new `server` initial state object.
Not really a conflict.
Merged upstream's changes.
- `app/views/admin/settings/edit.html.haml`:
Upstream added new settings.
Not really a conflict.
Merged upstream's changes.
- `app/workers/scheduler/feed_cleanup_scheduler.rb`:
Upstream refactored that part and removed the file.
Ported our relevant changes into `app/lib/vacuum/feeds_vacuum.rb`
- `config/settings.yml`:
Upstream added new settings.
Not a real conflict.
Added upstream's new settings.
