@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ Please send a merge request with a tested solution or a merge request with a fai
1.**Output of checks**
* Results of GitLab [Application Check](doc/install/installation.md#check-application-status)(`sudo -u git -H bundle exec rake gitlab:check RAILS_ENV=production SANITIZE=true`); we will only investigate if the tests are passing
* Version of GitLab you are running; we will only investigate issues in the latest stable and development releases as per the [maintenance policy](MAINTENANCE.md)
* Add the last commit sha1 of the GitLab version you used to replicate the issue (obtainable from the help page)
* Add the last commit SHA-1 of the GitLab version you used to replicate the issue (obtainable from the help page)
* Describe your setup (use relevant parts from `sudo -u git -H bundle exec rake gitlab:env:info RAILS_ENV=production`)
1. **Possible fixes**: If you can, link to the line of code that might be responsible for the problem
...
...
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ If you can, please submit a merge request with the fix or improvements including
The **official merge window** is in the beginning of the month from the 1st to the 7th day of the month. The best time to submit a MR and get feedback fast. Before this time the GitLab B.V. team is still dealing with work that is created by the monthly release such as assisting subscribers with upgrade issues, the release of Enterprise Edition and the upgrade of GitLab Cloud. After the 7th it is already getting closer to the release date of the next version. This means there is less time to fix the issues created by merging large new features.
Please keep the change in a single MR **as small as possible**. If you want to contribute a large feature think very hard what the minimum viable change is. Can you split functionality? Can you only submit the backend/API code? Can you start with a very simple UI? Can you do part of the refactor? The increased reviewability of small MR's that leads to higher code quality is more important to us than having a mimimal commit log. The smaller a MR is the more likely it is it will be merged (quickly), after that you can send more MR's to enhance it.
Please keep the change in a single MR **as small as possible**. If you want to contribute a large feature think very hard what the minimum viable change is. Can you split functionality? Can you only submit the backend/API code? Can you start with a very simple UI? Can you do part of the refactor? The increased reviewability of small MR's that leads to higher code quality is more important to us than having a minimal commit log. The smaller a MR is the more likely it is it will be merged (quickly), after that you can send more MR's to enhance it.
For examples of feedback on merge requests please look at already [closed merge requests](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests?assignee_id=&label_name=&milestone_id=&scope=&sort=&state=closed). If you would like quick feedback on your merge request feel free to mention one of the Merge Marshalls of [the core-team](https://about.gitlab.com/core-team/). Please ensure that your merge request meets the following contribution acceptance criteria.
...
...
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ For examples of feedback on merge requests please look at already [closed merge
1. Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
1. Why was this MR needed?
1. What are the relevant issue numbers / [Feature requests](http://feedback.gitlab.com/)?
1. Screenshots (If appropiate)
1. Screenshots (If appropriate)
## Contribution acceptance criteria
...
...
@@ -115,4 +115,4 @@ For examples of feedback on merge requests please look at already [closed merge
1.[Shell commands](doc/development/shell_commands.md) created by GitLab contributors to enhance security
This is also the style used by linting tools such as [Rubocop](https://github.com/bbatsov/rubocop), [PullReview](https://www.pullreview.com/) and [Hound CI](https://houndci.com).
This is also the style used by linting tools such as [RuboCop](https://github.com/bbatsov/rubocop), [PullReview](https://www.pullreview.com/) and [Hound CI](https://houndci.com).
We use [these build scripts](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ci/blob/master/doc/examples/build_script_gitlab_ce.md) for testing with GitLab CI.
# Build configuration on [Semaphore](https://semaphoreapp.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/) for testing the [GitHub.com repo](https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq)
Git is a distributed version control system (DVCS).
This means that everyone that works with the source code has a local copy of the complete repository.
In GitLab every project member that is not a guest (so reporters, developers and masters) can clone the repository to get a local copy.
After obtaining this local copy the user can upload the full repository anywhere, including another project under their control or another server.
The consequense is that you can't build access controls that prevent the intentional sharing of source code by users that have access to the source code.
This is an inherent feature of a DVCS and all git management systems have this limitation.
Obviously you can take steps to prevent unintentional sharing and information destruction, this is why only some people are allowed to invite others and nobody can force push a protected branch.
* HTTP setups: Make `/etc/nginx/sites-available/nginx` the same as https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/7-3-stable/lib/support/nginx/gitlab but with your settings.
* HTTPS setups: Make `/etc/nginx/sites-available/nginx-ssl` the same as https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/7-3-stable/lib/support/nginx/gitlab-ssl but with your setting
* HTTP setups: Make `/etc/nginx/sites-available/nginx` the same as https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/7-3-stable/lib/support/nginx/gitlab but with your settings.
* HTTPS setups: Make `/etc/nginx/sites-available/nginx-ssl` the same as https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/7-3-stable/lib/support/nginx/gitlab-ssl but with your setting
