GrapeDSL for project hooks

See merge request !6963

Fix: Todos Filter Shows All Users

Closes #22588

See merge request !7258

Only skip group when it's actually a group in the "Share with group" select

Fixes #23961

See merge request !7262

Update rdoc to `~> 4.2`

Closes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/2814

See merge request !7261

Backport Group API code that was added in EE only

Group API code that was added in EE only. /cc @vsizov

See merge request !7205

Fix: Guest sees some repository details and gets 404

Closes #24056

See merge request !7222

Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Resolve "Introduce round-robin project creation to spread load over multiple shards"

## What does this MR do?

Allow multiple shards to be enabled in the admin settings page, balancing project creation across all enabled shards.

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

* `f.select ..., multiple: true` isn't the most beautiful UI in the world, but switching to `collection_check_boxes` (or a facsimile thereof) isn't trivial
* Should `pick_repository_storage` be a method of `ApplicationSetting`, or `Project`? It's going to accrete logic over time so perhaps it should be its own class already?
* This is written to avoid the need for a database migration, so it is`serialize :repository_storage` without `, Array`. This is tested, but alternatives include:
  * Add a database migration
  * Write a custom Coder that will accept a String or Array in `load` and always `dump an Array.

## Why was this MR needed?

## Screenshots (if relevant)

![Screen_Shot_2016-11-03_at_14.42.41](/uploads/7de15d6c1b3fa60bb7a34d6a7d9f00ce/Screen_Shot_2016-11-03_at_14.42.41.png)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [X] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md) entry added
- [X] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [x] API support added
- Tests
  - [X] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [X] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [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 it does - rebase it please)
- [X] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

Closes #24059

See merge request !7273

Clarify NGINX config setup

These changes are to clarify that the paths may need to be changed in 
the NGINX config file depending on where GitLab is installed.

See merge request !6834

Fix Docs links

This fixes some links in the docs to either be relative or to use HTTPS and docs.gitlab.com.

See merge request !7280

Issues atom feed url reflect filters on dashboard

Makes the issue atom feed url reflect the selected filters on the issue dashboard page and project's issues page.

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

The solution isn't based on javascript and filters functionality but on the current url parameters. It didn't seem right especially when writing tests.

## Why was this MR needed?

After filtering the issues, users may press the feed button and see a different list of issues to what is shown on the HTML page

Closes #22947

See merge request !7259

Updated styling commit SHA on branches page

## What does this MR do?

Updated styling of commit SHA on the branches page to include the commit icon and be blue

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


## Why was this MR needed?
to make the branches page in line with upcoming update to the commit list, which also styles the commit sha, but slightly different.

## Screenshots (if relevant)
before:
![image](/uploads/ce6eae30d0a07be2d76881d3c5e04e7d/image.png)

after:
![image](/uploads/a10df4fe6efbb168fc9b51ae87f53da7/image.png)


## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [x] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md) entry added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] 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 it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

Closes #24022

See merge request !7219

Make specs a bit faster

See merge request !6992

Show log corresponding to env in admin/logs

Closes #23979

See merge request !7191

Merge branch '24017-long-build-list-dropdowns-which-scroll-are-not-immediately-obvious' into 'master'

change build list height to show 6,5 builds + improve padding of list, with firs…

## What does this MR do?

lets the builds dropdown in the pipeline graph show only 6,5 builds instead of 7.. so its easier to know if a user can scroll

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

I changed the padding of the list to 0 and gave the 8px top and bottom padding from the `ul` to the `first-child` and `last-child` li elements inside the list. Is that okey. Reason why, is that it breaks the list off correctly at the edges:)

![image](/uploads/f386e550a6044718035065a4ffd1e5a2/image.png) vs ![image](/uploads/4b535816f148771c26f4d4f3937d0305/image.png)




## Why was this MR needed?

easier to let people know when its possible to scroll.. to expect more builds

## Screenshots (if relevant)

![image](/uploads/ecfd34625063f566987a81f0e3f50251/image.png)


## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md) entry added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] 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 it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

Closes #24017

See merge request !7210

change build list height to show 6,5 builds + improve padding of list, with first/last child selectors

Cleaned up global namespace JS

Original MR: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/6229

## What does this MR do?
Cleans up javascript global namespace by moving the functions that were previously on the window.doSomething namespace

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
None that I'm aware of

## Why was this MR needed?
Improves code maintainability and deals with some of the technical debt 

## Screenshots (if relevant)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [X] [CHANGELOG](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CHANGELOG) entry added
- Tests
  - [X] All builds are passing
- [X] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [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)
- [X] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?
Closes #19661

See merge request !7208

Add tip for using Chrome to run and debug teaspoon tests.

## What does this MR do?

Documents the approach I use when writing and debugging frontend tests, which is (IMHO) much better than running locally from the command line.

See merge request !7257

Ignore `builds` directory from eslint

Running `rake eslint` locally was including this directory reporting so many errors that are not from our source code.

See merge request !7279

Moved most of the functions that contained "window.doSomething" that were located at:
- app/assets/javascripts/application.js
To the following file:
- app/assets/javascripts/lib/utils/common_utils.js

The functions listed here:
- window.ajaxGet
- window.split
- window.extractLast
- window.rstrip
- window.disableButtonIfEmptyField
- window.disableButtonIfAnyEmptyField
- window.sanitize
- window.unbindEvents
- window.shiftWindow

Now will be accessible from the "gl.utils" namespace

eslint: Fix invalid filename validation

Attempt to fix the following error which is appearing in every new MR since `eslint-plugin-filenames` was introduced.

```
/builds/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/app/assets/javascripts/gl_field_error.js.es6
  2:1  error  Filename 'gl_field_error.js.es6' does not match the naming convention  filenames/match-regex
```

This was happening because our ES6 files have the following structure `gl_hello_world.js.es6`. So `eslint-plugin-filenames` was considering as base name `gl_hello_world.js` which didn't pass the previous regex `^[a-z_]+$`

This new regex allows the following filenames to pass as valid:

- `gl_hello_world.js.es6` which base name translates to `gl_hello_world.js` 
-  `gl_foo_bar.js` which base name translates to `gl_foo_bar`
-  `d3.js` which base name translates to `d3` (especial case, maybe we should move this to the vendor dir and make the regex more specific)

See merge request !7281