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?
Related
I am using Azure Devops in an IT environment with many different development teams and git repositories. Each development team owns one or more repositories. It's my job to work on various application components contained in said repositories. Because I do not own those repositories, I should not make any changes in build/release pipelines, build policies etc, all by myself because that can impact other people's work.
Now let's say I have a feature branch named UpgradedFeature in the repository FeatureRepository, containing my changes. Said changes also introduce a breaking change in the build pipeline used for that repository for the master branch. Let's say that pipeline is named MasterBuildPipeline.
So in order for my build based on the branch UpgradedFeature to succeed and not impact other people's work, I make a clone of the MasterBuildPipeline, name it UpgradedFeatureBuildPipeline and configure the breaking changes. This new build pipeline is used exclusively by me for the UpgradedFeature branch only.
The build, now using the new UpgradedFeatureBuildPipeline pipeline succeeds and now I want to merge into master , so I make a pull request to merge the changes contained in UpgradedFeature into master. The master branch has a branch policy in place named MasterBranchPolicy like described on https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/repos/git/branch-policies?view=azure-devops&tabs=browser. This branch policy contains the MasterBuildPipeline and prevents completion of that pull request when the build using that pipeline does not succeed.
So my problem is that my pull request triggers the MasterBranchPolicy containing the MasterBuildPipeline and not the UpgradedFeatureBuildPipeline containing the necessary breaking changes for the build to succeed. So the build fails and I cannot complete the pull request.
Of course I could edit the MasterBuildPipeline for a short time, introduce my breaking changes, run the build, then discard the breaking changes again. But there's a chance I may impact other people's work with that and somehow I have a feeling that's not the right approach. I could also edit or disable the MasterBranchPolicy for a short time but again, I may impact other people's work and I feel it's not the right approach.
How should I do this?
So the build fails and I cannot complete the pull request.
To complete the pull request even through the build fails, you could grant yourself Bypass permissions. Bypass permissions let you complete pull requests that don't satisfy branch policies. You can grant bypass permissions to yourself then complete the pull request. Here is Bypass branch policies for reference.
Please navigate to Project setting >> Repositories >> The repo >> Security >> user (yourself) >> Bypass policies when completing pull requests.
Then, you can Override branch policies and enable merge even the MasterBuildPipeline faild.
Please also note that use caution when granting the ability to bypass policies, especially at the repo and project levels. Policies are a cornerstone of secure and compliant source code management. In your scenario, it's suggested to edit the MasterBuildPipeline and the MasterBranchPolicy or disable the MasterBranchPolicy as you mentioned.
Generally, workflow of DevOps Branching Strategy as follows
Developer will create a feature or bugfix branch out of develop. One feature or bugfix branch usually stands for one JIRA bug or feature item. These branches are personal
The changes will be pushed into the developer's feature or bugfix branch.
When the new feature or bugfix is complete.A developer will create a pull request. Pull requests open a code review phase.
Once a pull request has been approved, the team lead or development team will move it into development.
When the development branch has all the epics and bug fixes, i.e., the content planned for the next release, the development team or team lead will create a release branch. This initiates the release regression testing phase.At this stage, only bug fixes are accepted for release, and the workflow is similar to that of the development branch.
Having a separate release branch will enable future development towards the next release in the development branch. Features for the next release are not included in this release. However, bug fixes for this release will be incorporated into the development of the next release as well.
When release content meets the criteria, the release branch will be frozen, which means that it ends. Content from releases will be merged to master and tagged there. For the next release, a new release branch is created when needed.
As per my experience, I would suggest creating branching policies like
A pull request is requested to merge the develop, release, and master branches.
Pull request approvers should be leads.
All developers can create feature branches.
All developers can push to hotfix and feature branches. Commit messages must include the JIRA issue id.
I have a Cloudflare page that uses python-sphinxto build docs. For some of my commits, it downloads a different version of sphinx than others and fails to build docs correctly.
What I tried:
Adding a dummy commit on top of a failing build seems to fix an issue and force Cloudflare builder to download the correct sphinx version
re-running deployments doesn't fix the issue
creating a new branch with the same head(failing commit) and running another deployment doesn't fix the issue
changing between preview/production deployments has no impact on this issue
Here is a dummy commit I added to make the docs build correctly
Commit one result vs. Commit two result
The diff in deployment logs old commits, the left is Commit 1(not working), and the right, Commit two, correctly builds all three tasks and the releases.
https://www.diffchecker.com/ZpV8vE9D
I have tried making different branches and re-run deployments to check whether the sphinx version will change, but it seems like it's bounded the the "old commit". This is also an issue for other Cloudflare Pages, and using preview/production deployments has no impact on this problem.
The issue in this case was actually not with sphinx version but with the fact that I was using:
git fetch --all
Which does not guarantee pulling the tags with it.
The --all pull from all remotes instead of "everything" as I thought.
Using git fetch --tags instead fixed the issue
Indeed it seems to be a bug, in this case I recommend you to consult directly with CloudFlare support, sometimes they are errors that remain internally in your account and you unbug it, CloudFlare Pages for the moment continues to improve its system, there are details to be corrected.
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.
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.
Our team members are not all familiar with git, some members may take a mistake to force push the local branch on to server especially if they are using Windows GUI tools.
I'm wondering if there is any way to control the force push permission for different roles. I googled, but found no answer. I'm using latest Gitlab.
Not yet (should be in GitLab 6.8+): there is a pull request in progress: "pull 6190", which stemmed from this suggestion.
GitLab already has protected branches that prevent push for all except masters. However, there's still the problem of accidental history rewrites and force pushes by masters that can wipe out the whole repository (has happened in real life).
Therefore it is useful to additionally have protection against branch deletion and history rewriting.
The code changes are visible here and are based on a pull request on gitlab-shell, with a definition in lib/gitlab_update.rb:
def forced_push?
missed_refs = IO.popen(%W(git rev-list #{#newrev}..#{#oldrev} --)).read
missed_refs.split("\n").size > 0
end