Conflicts:
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream renamed an initial state parameter, where we had extra ones.
Renamed as upstream did.
- `app/workers/feed_insert_worker.rb`:
Upstream wrapped database query in a block, we had extra database
queries because of the DM timeline.
Moved everything in the block.
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`.
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.
* Run rubocop --autocorrect on app/, config/ and lib/, also manually fix some remaining style issues
* Run rubocop --autocorrect-all on db/
* Run rubocop --autocorrect-all on `spec/` and fix remaining issues
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:
- `README.md`:
Upstream README has been changed, but we have a completely different one.
Kept our `README.md`.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Change the code style to match upstream's but otherwise do not change our
code.
- `spec/lib/sanitize_config_spec.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Kept our version, since the tests are mostly glitch-soc's, except for cases
which are purposefuly different.
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:
- `README.md`:
Minor upstream change, our README is completely different.
Kept ours.
- `lib/tasks/assets.rake`:
glitch-soc has extra code to deal with its theming system,
upstream changed a line that exists in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
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:
- `config/i18n-tasks.yml`:
Upstream added new ignored strings, glitch-soc has extra ignored strings
because of the theming system.
Added upstream's changes.
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
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.
