Conflicts:
- `package.json`:
Upstream removed a dependency textually close to a glitch-only dependency.
Updated as upstream while keeping our dependency.
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/mastodon/features/compose/components/poll_form.jsx`:
Upstream changed how icons are handled, including on a line modified by
glitch-soc to bump the number of poll options.
Applied upstream's change, while keeping the increased number of poll
options.
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/auth/registrations_controller.rb`:
Not a real conflict. Upstream removed the `set_instance_presenter` private
method from this class, and glitch-soc has an extra private method right
besides it for the theming system.
Removed `set_instance_presenter` as upstream did.
- `app/controllers/auth/sessions_controller.rb`:
Not a real conflict. Upstream removed the `set_instance_presenter` private
method from this class, and glitch-soc has an extra private method right
besides it for the theming system.
Removed `set_instance_presenter` as upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `app/models/form/admin_settings.rb`:
Upstream added the notion of overriden settings, while we had extra code for
pseudo-settings (only used to combine flavour and skin in a single select
field).
Ported upstream changes.
- `config/i18n-tasks.yml`:
Upstream added `simple_form.overridden` to `ignore_unused`,
we had `simple_form.glitch_only`.
Added `simple_form.glitch_only` as well.
Conflicts:
- `.rubocop_todo.yml`:
Upstream re-generated the file, while glitch-soc has a specific ignore
for some file.
Updated the file as upstream did and kept our extra ignore.
- `config/webpack/shared.js`:
Upstream added a plugin, but our files are pretty different.
Added the plugin as well.
- `spec/helpers/application_helper_spec.rb`:
Upstream refactored tests, but part of them were different because
of glitch-soc's theming system.
Applied the refactoring to glitch-soc's change.
Conflicts:
- `.rubocop_todo.yml`:
Upstream regenerated this file, glitch-soc had a specific ignore.
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, but glitch-soc has a completely different one.
Kept glitch-soc's README
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto-mono.scss`:
Upstream updated the linter, which changed a few linter rules.
Some of those changed lines are different in glitch-soc because we use
different paths for the assets.
Applied the same style rules on our version of the file.
- `app/javascript/styles/fonts/roboto.scss`:
Upstream updated the linter, which changed a few linter rules.
Some of those changed lines are different in glitch-soc because we use
different paths for the assets.
Applied the same style rules on our version of the file.
Conflicts:
- app/controllers/application_controller.rb:
Upstream added an `include` where we had an extra `include` due to
glitch-soc's theming system.
Added upstream's new `include`.
Conflicts:
- `db/migrate/20180831171112_create_bookmarks.rb`:
Upstream ran a lint fix on this file, but this file is different in
glitch-soc because the feature was added much earlier.
Ran the lint fix on our own version of the file.
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/mastodon/load_locale.js`:
The file moved to `app/javascript/mastodon/locales/load_locale.ts`.
Ported the changes there and deleted `app/javascript/mastodon/load_locale.js`.
- `app/javascript/mastodon/locales/index.js`:
The file moved to `app/javascript/mastodon/locales/index.ts`.
Did *not* port the changes as I want to try something a bit different.
Conflicts:
- `package.json`:
Upstream changed various script definitions in lines surrounding the one for
`i18n:extract`, which had glitch-soc-specific changes.
Updated the scripts as upstream did, while keeping our changes to
`i18n:extract`.
Claire