Fix bug where destroying a namespace would not always destroy projects
    
There is a race condition in DestroyGroupService now that projects are deleted asynchronously:
    
1. User attempts to delete group
2. DestroyGroupService iterates through all projects and schedules a Sidekiq job to delete each Project
3. DestroyGroupService destroys the Group, leaving all its projects without a namespace
4. Projects::DestroyService runs later but the can?(current_user,
    :remove_project) is `false` because the user no longer has permission to
    destroy projects with no namespace.
5. This leaves the project in pending_delete state with no namespace/group.
 
Projects without a namespace or group also adds another problem: it's not possible to destroy the container registry tags, since `container_registry_path_with_namespace` is the wrong value.

The fix is to destroy the group asynchronously and run `execute` directly on Projects::DestroyService.
 
Closes #17893

See merge request !4341

Update ruby 2.3.1

We where using 2.3.0, now 2.3.1

cc @connorshea 

See merge request !5790

Resolve "Format branch, tag, and commit in environment list"

## What does this MR do?
Updates Environments page rows to match the new pipeline updates

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
I removed `private` from `avatars_helper.rb` so I could use `user_avatar`.

## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #20059 

## Screenshots (if relevant)
![Screen_Shot_2016-08-08_at_11.44.36_AM](/uploads/62fbb475a7d9cc613fe5ba1715229553/Screen_Shot_2016-08-08_at_11.44.36_AM.png)
![Screen_Shot_2016-08-08_at_11.44.41_AM](/uploads/ce1bd3ab62c0bc8091e9b6f85012ed36/Screen_Shot_2016-08-08_at_11.44.41_AM.png)



See merge request !5687

Instrument Project.visible_to_user

## What does this MR do?

This MR instruments `Project.visible_to_user`

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

No.

## Why was this MR needed?

The method in question was not instrumented due to being a Rails scope.

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

#12425

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added
- Tests
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [x] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if you do - rebase it please)
- [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

See merge request !5793

Improve pipeline processing

## What does this MR do?
This works on top of https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/5295 trying to solve some edge cases introduced by that Merge Request. The fix switches to a state machine which is already a part of `Ci::Pipeline` and uses events with conditional transitions to switch between pipeline states.

This is approach is much more bullet proof and much easier to understand than a previous one where we were calling a `reload_status!` which manually updated `status`. Previous approach become confusing and prone to number of errors.

## Why was this MR needed?
This improves changes introduced by https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/5295

## What are the relevant issue numbers?
None, yet.

## Screenshots (if relevant)
Not needed.

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added (not needed since changelog for https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/5295 is already introduced)
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [x] API support added (not needed)
- Tests
  - [x] Added for this feature/bug (most of tests do cover the triggering of Pipeline)
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [x] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if you do - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

See merge request !5782

Because this method is a Rails scope we have to instrument it manually
as regular the instrumentation methods only instrument methods defined
directly on a Class or Module.

Corrected links/usernames in performance guide

## What does this MR do?

This fixes two broken links in the performance guide and removes the mention of Josh as he no longer works for GitLab.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

No.

## Why was this MR needed?

The guide contained two broken links, and Josh no longer works for GitLab.

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

None.

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [x] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if you do - rebase it please)
- [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

See merge request !5772