Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/auth/setup_controller.rb`:
Upstream removed a method close to a glitch-soc theming-related method.
Removed the method like upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `package.json`:
Upstream removed a dependency that was textually close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency.
Removed the dependency as upstream did, while keeping the glitch-soc-only
dependency.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream added a link to the roadmap, but we have a completely different README.
Kept ours.
- `app/models/media_attachment.rb`:
Upstream upped media attachment limits.
Updated the default according to upstream's.
- `db/migrate/20180831171112_create_bookmarks.rb`:
Upstream changed the migration compatibility level.
Did so too.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream refactored this file but we have a different version.
Kept our version.
- `app/controllers/settings/preferences_controller.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file does not directly references individual settings anymore.
Applied upstream changes.
- `app/lib/user_settings_decorator.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file got removed entirely.
Removed it as well.
- `app/models/user.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
References to individual settings have been removed from the file.
Removed them as well.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/notifications/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/other/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `config/settings.yml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
In particular, upstream removed user-specific and unused settings.
Did the same in glitch-soc.
- `spec/controllers/application_controller_spec.rb`:
Conflicts due to glitch-soc's theming system.
Mostly kept our version, as upstream messed up the tests.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream changed their README, we have our own.
Kept ours.
- `app/helpers/application_helper.rb`:
Minor code style fix upstream, on a line that is different in glitch-soc
due to the different theming system.
Applied the code style fix to our own code.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Code style fix on a line next to lines exclusive to glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream updated a dependency textually close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency.
Updated the dependency like upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream switched to pushing to both DockerHub and GitHub Container
Repository, while glitch-soc was already pushing to the latter only.
Updated our configuration to be slightly more consistent with upstream's
naming and styling, but kept our behavior.
- `Gemfile.lock`:
Updated dependencies textually too close to glitch-soc only hcaptcha
dependency.
Updated dependencies as upstream did.
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, but we have a completely different one.
Kept our README, though it probably should be reworked at some point.
- `app/views/auth/sessions/two_factor.html.haml`:
Minor style fix upstream that's on a line glitch-soc removed because
of its different theming system.
Kept our file as is.
- `spec/controllers/health_controller_spec.rb`:
This file apparently did not exist upstream, upstream created it with
different contents but it is functionally the same.
Switched to upstream's version of the file.
- `spec/presenters/instance_presenter_spec.rb`:
Upstream changed the specs around `GITHUB_REPOSITORY`, while glitch-soc
had its own code because it's a fork and does not have the same default
source URL.
Took upstream's change, but with glitch-soc's repo as the default case.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream dependencies textually too close to a glitch-soc only one.
Updated dependencies as upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream added a line at the end of the file, while glitch-soc had its own
extra lines.
Took upstream's change.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`:
We have our custom CONTRIBUTING.md quoting upstream. Upstream made changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `app/controllers/application_controller.rb`:
Upstream made code style changes in a method that is entirely replaced
in glitch-soc.
Ignored the change.
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Code style changes textually close to glitch-soc-specific changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Ignored them.
Conflicts:
- `.github/dependabot.yml`:
Upstream made changes while we have dropped this file.
Keep the file deleted.
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream made changes at the end of the file, where we
had our extra lines.
Just moved our extra lines back at the end.
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
- `app/services/backup_service.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream updated `docker/build-push-action`, and we a different config
for `docker/metadata-action` so the lines directly above were different,
but it's not a real conflict.
Upgraded `docker/build-push-action` as upstream did.
- `app/javascript/mastodon/features/compose/components/compose_form.js`:
Upstream changed the codestyle near a line we had modified to accommodate
configurable character count.
Kept our change.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, while we have a completely different one.
Kept our README.
- `app/controllers/concerns/web_app_controller_concern.rb`:
Conflict because of glitch-soc's theming system.
Additionally, glitch-soc has different behavior regarding moved accounts.
Ported some of the changes, but kept our overall behavior.
- `app/javascript/packs/admin.js`:
Code changes actually applied to `app/javascript/core/admin.js`
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Discarded upstream changes: we have our own README
- `app/controllers/follower_accounts_controller.rb`:
Port upstream's minor refactoring
* Added hadolint as Dockerfile linter in pipeline and resolved remaining hadolint issues in Dockerfile
* Use more specific version of hadolint Action
* Bumpt hadolint Action version to latest version to avoid deprecation notice
* Being _really_ specific now
Conflicts:
- `app/models/concerns/domain_materializable.rb`:
Fixed a code style issue upstream in a PR that got merged in glitch-soc
earlier.
Changed the code to match upstream's.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream changed how docker images were built, including how
they were cached.
I don't know much about it, so applied upstream's changes.
- `app/controllers/admin/domain_blocks_controller.rb`:
The feature, that was in glitch-soc, got backported upstream.
It also had a few fixes upstream, so those have been ported!
- `app/javascript/packs/admin.js`:
Glitch-soc changes have been backported upstream. As a result,
some code from `app/javascript/core/admin.js` got added upstream.
Kept our version since our shared Javascript already has that feature.
- `app/models/user.rb`:
Upstream added something to distinguish unusable and unusable-because-moved
accounts, while glitch-soc considers moved accounts usable.
Took upstream's code for `functional_or_moved?` and made `functional?`
call it.
- `app/views/statuses/_simple_status.html.haml`:
Upstream cleaned up code style a bit, on a line that we had custom changes
for.
Applied upstream's change while keeping our change.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream adopted one CSP directive we already had.
The conflict is because of our files being structurally different, but the
change itself was already part of glitch-soc.
Kept our version.
Conflicts:
- `app/views/admin/announcements/edit.html.haml`:
Upstream change too close to theming-related glitch-soc change.
Ported upstream changes.
- `app/views/admin/announcements/new.html.haml`
Upstream change too close to theming-related glitch-soc change.
Ported upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/mastodon/features/compose/components/poll_form.js`:
glitch-soc change because of having changed the default number of
available poll options.
Applied upstream's changes while keeping glitch-soc's default number of
poll options.
- `public/oops.png`:
We had a minor graphics change, probably not worth diverging from upstream.
Took upstream version.
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/home_controller.rb`:
Upstream made it so `/web` is available to non-logged-in users
and `/` redirects to `/web` instead of `/about`.
Kept our version since glitch-soc's WebUI doesn't have what's
needed yet and I think /about is still a much better landing
page anyway.
- `app/models/form/admin_settings.rb`:
Upstream added new settings, and glitch-soc had an extra setting.
Not really a conflict.
Added upstream's new settings.
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream added a new `server` initial state object.
Not really a conflict.
Merged upstream's changes.
- `app/views/admin/settings/edit.html.haml`:
Upstream added new settings.
Not really a conflict.
Merged upstream's changes.
- `app/workers/scheduler/feed_cleanup_scheduler.rb`:
Upstream refactored that part and removed the file.
Ported our relevant changes into `app/lib/vacuum/feeds_vacuum.rb`
- `config/settings.yml`:
Upstream added new settings.
Not a real conflict.
Added upstream's new settings.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Fix erroneous deletion in a previous merge.
- `Gemfile`:
Conflict caused by glitch-soc-only hCaptcha dependency
- `app/controllers/auth/sessions_controller.rb`:
Minor conflict due to glitch-soc's theming system.
- `app/controllers/filters_controller.rb`:
Minor conflict due to glitch-soc's theming system.
- `app/serializers/rest/status_serializer.rb`:
Minor conflict due to glitch-soc having an extra `local_only` property
Conflicts:
- `.github/dependabot.yml`:
Changed upstream, while we modified it in glitch-soc to not get spammed
by dependabot.
Kept it removed.
- `README.md`:
Changed upstream, which has a very different version.
Discarded upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/montserrat.scss`:
Code style changes upstream, path changes in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream's code style changes.
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto-mono.scss`:
Code style changes upstream, path changes in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream's code style changes.
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto.scss`:
Code style changes upstream, path changes in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream's code style changes.
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Textual conflict only caused by glitch-soc using a different value
for character limits in a nearby line.
Applied upstream's changes.
- `app/views/statuses/_simple_status.html.haml`:
Attribute added to a tag modified by glitch-soc.
Added upstream's attributes.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream added/updated dependencies close to glitch-soc-only ones.
Updated/added upstream dependencies.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream changed the workflow a bit.
Conflict comes from us pushing to ghcr while upstream pushes to dockerhub.
Ported the upstream changes while still pushing to ghcr.
Conflicts:
- `db/schema.rb`:
Conflict due to glitch-soc adding the `content_type` column on status edits
and thus having a different schema version number.
Solved by taking upstream's schema version number, as it is higher than
glitch-soc's.
Conflicts:
- `CHANGELOG.md`:
Upstream added newlines.
Conflicts are because the CHANGELOG was independently merged from 3.4.6 on
last security update.
Took upstream's version.
- `app/helpers/context_helper.rb`:
Conflicts because of extra vocabulary in glitch-soc. The conflicts were
actually handled in last security merge.
Kept our version.
Logically, it makes more sense to provide the steps leading up to the bug before asking what the bug is. This change moves "steps to reproduce" above "expected behavior" and "actual behavior" to enforce the above progression and logical flow.
* Build container image by GitHub Actions
* Trigger docker build only pushed to main branch
* Tweak tagging imgae
- "edge" is the main branch
- "latest" is the tagged latest release
Conflicts:
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`:
Upstream file has changed and we're quoting it.
Ported the changes.
- `README.md`:
Upstream file has changed but we have a completely different one.
Kept our version.
- `lib/mastodon/version.rb`:
Upstream has changed from `tootsuite/mastodon` to `mastodon/mastodon`,
but we're still `glitch-soc/mastodon`.
Kept our version.
- `spec/presenters/instance_presenter_spec.rb`:
Upstream has changed from `tootsuite/mastodon` to `mastodon/mastodon`,
but we're still `glitch-soc/mastodon`.
Kept our version.
* Change references to tootsuite/mastodon to mastodon/mastodon
* Remove obsolete test fixture
* Replace occurrences of tootsuite/mastodon with mastodon/mastodon in CHANGELOG
And a few other places
Conflicts:
- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md`:
Removed upstream, while we had a checkbox telling people to check if the
issue was present upstream. Removed the file as well.
Conflicts:
- `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md`:
Upstream added the `bug` label to bug reports.
Did the same.
- `app/services/fan_out_on_write_service.rb`:
Upstream put DMs back into timelines, glitch-soc was already doing it.
Ignored upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `.env.production.sample`:
Upstream deleted it, I decided to keep it.
- `package.json`:
Upstream updated a dependency textually too close to wavesurfer.js
which has been deleted from upstream but is kept in glitch-soc for now.
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/activitypub/collections_controller.rb`:
Conflict due to glitch-soc having to take care of local-only
pinned toots in that controller.
Took upstream's changes and restored the local-only special
handling.
- `app/controllers/auth/sessions_controller.rb`:
Minor conflicts due to the theming system, applied upstream
changes, adapted the following two files for glitch-soc's
theming system:
- `app/controllers/concerns/sign_in_token_authentication_concern.rb`
- `app/controllers/concerns/two_factor_authentication_concern.rb`
- `app/services/backup_service.rb`:
Minor conflict due to glitch-soc having to handle local-only
toots specially. Applied upstream changes and restored
the local-only special handling.
- `app/views/admin/custom_emojis/index.html.haml`:
Minor conflict due to the theming system.
- `package.json`:
Upstream dependency updated, too close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency in the file.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream dependency updated, too close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency in the file.
Conflicts:
- README.md
- app/helpers/statuses_helper.rb
Upstream moved account helpers to their own file, we had extra
helpers there, moved too.
- app/lib/sanitize_config.rb
- app/models/user.rb
- app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb
- config/locales/simple_form.en.yml
- spec/lib/sanitize_config_spec.rb
Conflicts:
- app/models/account.rb
- app/views/settings/profiles/show.html.haml
- spec/controllers/api/v1/accounts/credentials_controller_spec.rb
Conflicts were due to an increase in account bio length upstream, which
is already covered in glitch-soc through `MAX_BIO_CHARS`.
Conflicts:
- .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md
Took our version.
- CONTRIBUTING.md
Updated the embedded copy of upstream's version.
- README.md
Took our version.
- app/policies/status_policy.rb
Not a real conflict, took code from both.
- app/views/layouts/embedded.html.haml
Added upstream's changes (dns-prefetch) and fixed
`%body.embed`
- app/views/settings/preferences/show.html.haml
Reverted some of upstream changes, as we have a
page dedicated for flavours and skins.
- config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb
Kept our version of the CSP.
- config/initializers/doorkeeper.rb
Not a real conflict, took code from both.
We don't have releases, so it don't make sense to mention.
On the other hand, a lot of our code is from upstream, so encourage people to
check whether it is a bug in glitch-soc or upstream.
Nick Schonning