Is it somehow possible to automatically add a label to GitLab issue in the git commit message? I know that it is possible to close issue by message fix #123, but how to add label to issue, for example, "Testing"?
No, this is not possible natively. The only thing you can do is mention the issue 'Fixes/Closes #123' as you mentioned.
If you really need to do this, then you could potentially do it as part of a custom server-side hook. You would have to interact with the GitLab API to add/manage the labels, but it would be possible. You can learn more about this in Custom Hooks Documentation.
However, I generally recommend avoiding custom hooks. Especially ones that interact with an API as strange things can happen. For example, if you call an API in a pre-receive hook and that connection hangs, your push also hangs. It's not quite so bad for a post-receive but there could still be problems if a post-receive hangs indefinitely.
Related
I can close issues from the main branch, but if I'm on the 'dev' branch or another branch, the issues don't get closed. In the documentation, it says that closing commit issues can only be done on the master branch. Is there a way to do it? Or is it impossible?
It seems like you answered your own question. Per the documentation, automatic closing of issues only applies when commits are added to the default branch of the project.
While there is no feature for this provided by GitLab, you can implement this yourself as an alternative. For example, if you are using GitLab CI, you could develop your own CI job that uses the issues API to find and close issues. However, you will need to implement the applicable logic yourself.
We recently migrated from using Subversion and Trac to Git and GitLab. We successfully migrated all of our old data.
I'm still trying to learn GitLab and generally like it better than Trac, but one thing I don't like as much is that when you reference a GitLab Issue in the git commit, it adds a reference and link to that commit under the issue, but you have to browse to the commit itself to see the associated Git commit message.
In Trac, we had it configured such that the Subversion commit messages were all displayed in the Trac ticket with the commit link, so it was easier to view all the relevant information for that ticket in one place.
Is there a way to configure GitLab to display the Git commit message with the Git commit link that shows up under Issues? The message does show up in the commit list, but not on a referenced Issue.
I thought about trying to use a server hook to generate a note with the Git commit message when a commit is made, but just wondering if there is an easier/better way to accomplish this?
There is no built-in way to show the commit message of a crosslinked commit in the issue log. After all, commits are handled the same way as any other mentions: in the issue's history/mention log.
While the example in GitLab's documentation unfortunately misses the opportunity to show an example of a mention in the commit, here's an issue from GitLab itself with a mention. This commit also shows how mentions often get used within commits—with keywords:
Merge branch '65375-broken-master-gitlab-svg-path-test-failing' into 'master'
Update failing jest snapshot
Closes #13186
See merge request gitlab-org/gitlab-ee!14933
These kind of commits close the specific issue and don't require any further user action. Adding that kind of noise to the discussion/comment section of an issue is, in my opinion, only cluttering the discussion between actual humans*. However, the commit still shows up in the log and is clickable and hoverable.
To get back to your question:
Is there a way to configure GitLab to display the Git commit message with the Git commit link that shows up under Issues?
If you hover over the linked commit, then you'll get the commit's subject. There's nothing more that can be achieved within GitLab itself.
I thought about trying to use a server hook to generate a note with the Git commit message when a commit is made, but just wondering if there is an easier/better way to accomplish this?
If you follow the usual commit/merge message based issue closing and use [Closes?|Fix(es)?] #issue in your commit message, you may end up with more noise in the comments than you would like too.
* well, except for some bots
In git lab, you can create an issue, then within the issue you can create a branch. This branch is linked to the issue (I think because of the issue number at the start of the branch name), such that when you do a merge request on that branch it automatically closes the issue.
So my question is - how can you do this via the API? I can create the issue, but there is no control (as far as I can see) within the issue API to create the related branch.
Is that possible?
It would be nice to be able to create an issue with branch in one go - but I don't think that is possible?
Ok - its not perhaps the best answer, but here is what I came up with for a interim solution (in linux bash):
Raise the issue store response in cmd_resp
Extract the issue ID: echo $cmd_resp | grep -o -P '(?<=iid":).*(?=,"project_id)'.
Where the issue ID is found by looking for: iid":<ISSUE-ID>,"project_id
Create a branch with the name: <ISSUE-ID>-some-branch-name - by having the issue ID at the start of the branch name, gitlab automatically makes a relation to that issue.
So - its quite a simple approach, but it does not feel very integrated. I would still prefer to do that from the point of view of the issue.
It is not possible to create a branch related to an issue via the issues API.
However, this is in line with how RESTful APIs should be designed. If you want to create a branch, you need to make a POST request to the branches API.
POST /projects/:id/repository/branches
As you have already found out, GitLab is quite good at automatically linking issues, MRs and branches together.
For a branch to be linked to an issue, simply start the branch with the issue ID. However, usually it is enough if a merge request is linked to an issue. In my opinion, you shouldn't really be concerned with the branch. You can later access the branch via issue->MR->branch
Merge requests are linked to issues whenever a MR's description text links to an issue (e.g. #1). If you add an issue ID to the Closes statement, the issue will also be closed upon MR resolution.
Therefore, you could simply create a branch via the API, name it however you want. Then, create a MR from that issue and include Closes #1 in your MR description, where 1 is your issue ID.
Further, I would recommend using a more sophisticated REST client. You shouldn't have to parse the issue ID yourself. It is properly set as a field in the JSON response.
Short version: In gitlab how do I view all issues resolved in a commit (or merge request) given that I close issues using git comments (e.g. 'fix #10')?
Long version: In case there is an alternative solution what I'm ultimately trying to accomplish is this. Let's say developer fixes 10 issues, commits, creates merge request and deploys to the staging server. Now QA team needs to know the list of issues that were released so that they can test them. I know this can be done by manually labeling each issue(or assigning a milestone). But since gitlab already knows what issues were resolved in a commit it should be easy to view all issues associated with a commit/merge request. Is it possible to view them?
For my nodejs application, I am trying to run a hook through gitolite which performs the following actions (on the server side):
Update the repo to take into account the new changes (git fetch + git reset --hard newref)
Update the application dependencies (bower update, npm update / install)
Check some basic rules (coding rules, unit tests 100% ok, etc). Basically, it runs something like grunt test (jshint, mocha, ...)
Compile everything (grunt build)
Run the application
If one of these steps somehow fails, the whole process is stopped, the old application is restored and the push is denied.
My first approach was to add a pre-receive hook to this specific repo, but since it is triggered before the gitolite update hook (which checks about your rights), this was bad anyway.
So I now think about using VREFs which kind of work like a secondary update hook. So I'm pretty sure it would work like this, however it seems VREFs are usually here to perform only some basic checks, and don't intend to be used as something such a full deployment process.
I've done some research and it seems that usually people use a post-receive hook to deploy their app. This means that if something fails, the push is accepted anyway. I really would like to avoid accepting a commit which breaks the application at some point.
Is there a better way to achieve this deployment?